Philosophy of Computer Science: Online Resources

Position Paper #1:

What Is Computer Science?

Assignment

Introduction

Later, when your beliefs have been informed by further readings and by our discussions, you may wish to revise your beliefs. But you can't revise a belief that you don't have (you can only acquire new beliefs). So, here I am forcing you to discover, clarify, and defend the beliefs that you now have, by turning them into words and putting them on paper.

The Argument

1. Science is the systematic observation, description, experimental investigation, and theoretical explanation of natural phenomena.
2. Computer science is the study of computers and related phenomena.
3. Therefore, computer science is not a science.

(The Dean of Engineering has not yet argued that computer science is an engineering discipline; that may come later.)

How do you respond to the Dean of Engineering's argument? You may agree with it, or not (but there are several ways that might happen; see below).

You should ignore political considerations: You may suppose that the move from Science to Engineering involves no loss or gain of money, prestige, or anything else, and it is to be done, if at all, only on strictly intellectual grounds.

The Provost is eagerly awaiting your reply, and will abide by your decision … if, that is, you give a well-argued defense of your position.

Argument Analysis

1. Say (i) whether you agree that conclusion 3 logically follows from premise 1 and premise 2, (whether or not you agree with them),
   and say (ii) why you think that it follows or doesn't follow:
   ("I agree that conclusion 3 follows from premise 1 and premise 2, because …"
   OR
   "I don't agree that conclusion 3 follows from premise 1 and premise 2, because …"
   • If you think that conclusion 3 doesn't follow, then is there some (interesting, non-trivial) missing premise that would make it follow?
     (For a discussion of missing premises, see §2.9.3 of the book.)

2. Say whether you agree with premise 1 and say why you do or don't agree:
   ("I agree with premise 1, because …"
   OR
   "I disagree with premise 1, because …")

3. Say whether you agree with premise 2, and say why you do or don't agree:
   ("I agree with premise 2, because …"
   OR
   "I disagree with premise 2, because …")

4. If you thought that there were missing premises that validated the argument,
   then say whether you agree with them, and say why you do or don't agree.

5. If you think that the argument is logically invalid, then you might still agree or disagree with conclusion 3 independently of the reasons given for it by premise 1 and premise 2, (and any missing premises).
   • If so, then say whether you agree with conclusion 3, and say why you do or don't agree.

6. It's also possible that you might neither agree nor disagree with conclusion 3. Alternatively, you might both agree and disagree with it. For example, you might believe that computer science is both a science and an engineering discipline (or, alternatively, that it is neither).
   • If so, then please give your reasons for this.

And, if you are unsure about any of your answers, try to be very precise about why you are unsure and what further information would help you decide.

g. You might not agree with any of these ways to respond. However, I believe that any other response can, perhaps with a bit of force, be seen to fall under one of the above responses. But if you really feel that your position is not exactly characterized by any of the above responses, then please say:
• what your position is,
• why you believe it,
• and why you think it is not one of the above.

For general assistance on analyzing arguments, see §2.9 of the book.

Ground Rules:

1. Your answer should honestly reflect your beliefs (not what you think the fictional Provost or Dean of Engineering wants to hear!).

2. If you resort to a dictionary, textbook, article, website, etc., be sure to say which one. Give as much detailed information as you can that would assist someone else to locate the item by themselves. (See the "How to Handle Citations" section of my "How to Write" website for a suggested way to do this.)

3. Your position paper should be approximately 1 typed page and double-spaced (that is, about 250 words) (not including any bibliographic citations).
   • To help keep your paper short, you do not need any fancy introductory paragraph; you can assume that your reader is a fellow student in this course who has just done the same assignment.

   • If you write:
     • 1 paragraph analyzing validity,
     • 1 paragraph each analyzing the premises,
     • and 1 paragraph analyzing the conclusion,
     then you will have (more than) enough material.

4. Please bring 5 copies to lecture on the due date.

5. At the top of the (first) page, please put the following information:
   1. the title "Position Paper #1"
   2. your name
   3. the course you are enrolled in
   4. the due date.

   (The space taken up by this will not count against your total pages.)

DUE AT THE BEGINNING OF LECTURE, ONE WEEK FROM TODAY

Suggestions and Guidelines for Peer-Group Editing

1. When you get into your small groups:
   • introduce yourselves quickly,
   • share copies of your papers with each other,
   • and write each other's names on your paper
     (so that we have a record of who peer-reviewed whom).

2. Choose one paper to discuss first.
   (Suggestion: Go in alphabetical order by family name.)

3. The other people in the group might find it useful to imagine themselves as members of a committee set up by the Provost to make a recommendation. Their purpose is to try to help the author clarify his or her beliefs and arguments, so that they will be able to make a recommendation to the Provost on purely logical grounds (again: ignore politics!).

4. Start by asking the author to state (or read) his or her beliefs about whether computer science is a science, giving his or her reasons for those beliefs.

5. Be sure that the author has discussed:
   1. the validity of the argument
   2. the truth value of premise 1 (or their (dis)agreement with it)
   3. the truth value of premise 2, (or their (dis)agreement with it)
   4. the truth value of any missing premises (or their (dis)agreement with them)
   5. the truth value of conclusion 3 (or their (dis)agreement with it)
   • And, for each of the above, their reasons

6. Any time you have a question, ask it. Here are some suggestions:
   • Why did you say THIS rather than THAT?
   • What did you mean when you said THIS?
   • Can you give me an example of THIS?
   • Can you give me more details about THIS?
   • Do you think that THIS is always true?
   • Why? (This is always a good question to ask.)
   • How?

7. The author should not get defensive. The committee members are friendly. Critical, but friendly.

8. Keep a written record of the questions and replies. This will be useful to the author, for revision.

9. After spending about 10 minutes

   To the instructor: Actually, some number n of minutes close to 10 but less than or equal to m/s, where m is the total number of minutes in the class, and s is the total number of students in the group.

   on the first paper, move on to the next, going back to step 2, above, changing roles. Spend no more than 15 minutes

   Actually, n+5.

   per paper (because you've only got about 45 minutes

   Actually, m.}

   at most). Perhaps one member of the group can be a timekeeper.

10. At home, over the next week, please revise your paper to take into consideration the comments made by your fellow students (that is, your "peers"):

    Perhaps defend your claims better, or clarify statements that were misunderstood, etc. For help, see your instructor.

11. At the top of the first page of your revision, please put the following information:
    1. the title "Position Paper #1, 2nd draft"
    2. your name
    3. the course you are enrolled in
    4. the due date.

12. Please staple copies of your first draft, (with peer-editing comments, if any) to your second draft.

13. Your second draft should be substantially different from your first draft!