It seems to me that the ingredients of most theories both in Artificial Intelligence and in Psychology have been on the whole too minute, local, and unstructured to account–either practically or phenomenologically–for the effectiveness of common-sense thought. The "chunks" of reasoning, language, memory, and "perception" ought to be larger and more structured; their factual and procedural contents must be more intimately connected in order to explain the apparent power and speed of mental activities.

A study of a group of elementary school students learning to control a computer‐implemented Newtonian object reveals a surprisingly uniform and detailed collection of strategies, at the core of which is a robust “Aristotelian” expectation that things should move in the direction they are last pushed. A protocol of an undergraduate dealing with the same situation shows a large overlap with the set of strategies used by the elementary school children and thus a marked lack of influence of classroom physics (...) training on this student's naive physics. The data from these two studies are pooled and elaborated into a “genetic task analysis” of how one might come to understand Newtonian dynamics as a more or less natural evolution from the naive state. (shrink)

In this stimulating study of the logical character of selected fundamental topics of physics, Zinov'ev has written the first, and major, stage of a general semantics of science. In that sense he has shown, by rigorous examples, that in certain basic and surprising respects we may envision a reducibility of science to logic; and further that we may detect and eliminate frequent confusion of abstract and empirical objects. In place of a near chaos of unplanned theoretical languages, we may look (...) toward a unified and epistemologically clarified general scientific language. In the course of this work, Zinov'ev treats issues of continuing urgency: the non-trivial import of Zeno's paradoxes; the residually significant meaning of 'cause' in scientific explanation; the need for lucidity in the conceptions of 'wave' and 'particle', and his own account of these; the logic of fields and of field propagation; Kant's antimonies today; and, in a startling aper~u, an insightful note on 'measuring' consciousness. Logical physics, an odd-appearing field of investigation, is a part of logic; and as logic, logical physics deals with the linguistic expressions of time, space, particle, wave, field, causality, etc. How far this may be taken without explicit use of, or reference to, empirical statements is still to be clarified, but Zinov'ev takes a sympathetic reader well beyond a realist's expectation, beyond the classical conventionalist. Zinov'ev presents his investigations in four chapters and an appendix of technical elucidation. (shrink)

In this stimulating study of the logical character of selected fundamental topics of physics, Zinov'ev has written the first, and major, stage of a general semantics of science. In that sense he has shown, by rigorous examples, that in certain basic and surprising respects we may envision a reducibility of science to logic; and further that we may detect and eliminate frequent confusion of abstract and empirical objects. In place of a near chaos of unplanned theoretical languages, we may look (...) toward a unified and epistemologically clarified general scientific language. In the course of this work, Zinov'ev treats issues of continuing urgency: the non-trivial import of Zeno's paradoxes; the residually significant meaning of 'cause' in scientific explanation; the need for lucidity in the conceptions of 'wave' and 'particle', and his own account of these; the logic of fields and of field propagation; Kant's antimonies today; and, in a startling aper~u, an insightful note on 'measuring' consciousness. Logical physics, an odd-appearing field of investigation, is a part of logic; and as logic, logical physics deals with the linguistic expressions of time, space, particle, wave, field, causality, etc. How far this may be taken without explicit use of, or reference to, empirical statements is still to be clarified, but Zinov'ev takes a sympathetic reader well beyond a realist's expectation, beyond the classical conventionalist. Zinov'ev presents his investigations in four chapters and an appendix of technical elucidation. (shrink)