Newsgroups: comp.ai,comp.ai.philosophy,sci.logic,sci.philosophy.tech,sci.psychology,sci.psychology.theory,sci.cognitive
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!oitnews.harvard.edu!yale!zip.eecs.umich.edu!panix!news.mathworks.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!lll-winken.llnl.gov!uop!csus.edu!netcom.com!jqb
From: jqb@netcom.com (Jim Balter)
Subject: Re: On Going Beyond The Information Given & 'Cognition'
Message-ID: <jqbDCxor5.9IE@netcom.com>
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
References: <807627449snz@longley.demon.co.uk> <807660805snz@longley.demon.co.uk> <jqbDCwLsr.E6t@netcom.com> <807755503snz@longley.demon.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 1995 09:23:29 GMT
Lines: 27
Sender: jqb@netcom22.netcom.com
Xref: glinda.oz.cs.cmu.edu comp.ai:32267 comp.ai.philosophy:31357 sci.logic:13658 sci.philosophy.tech:19245 sci.psychology:45439 sci.psychology.theory:247 sci.cognitive:8904

In article <807755503snz@longley.demon.co.uk>,
David Longley  <David@longley.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>In article <jqbDCwLsr.E6t@netcom.com> jqb@netcom.com "Jim Balter" writes:
>
>> What really worries me is that "behavior scientists" want to be, not merely
>> scientists, but also engineers, politicians, and administrators.  Perhaps a
>> keener understanding of what science *is* would help.  And perhaps what is
>> missing here is a fine-grain analysis of the behavior of "behavior
>> scientists", along with some coarse correction to stem their anti-societal
>> tendencies.
>> 
>
>Why is trying to record, measure and systematically analyse observations of 
>behaviour anti-societal? Surely such a service is no more than an effort to
>be explcit and accountable?

Aside from pretending here that "behavior scientists" have no interest in
engineering behavior and no normative concerns as to what is "good" behavior
and what is "bad" behavior, and confusing bookkeeping with science, you also
ignored my example of Tycho Brahe doing "direct quotation" of star behavior
and Kepler doing something somewhat different.  That we are all so aware of
examples such as this throughout science makes your pronouncements seem
nonsensical.  Thus it would behoove you to address them.

-- 
<J Q B>

