Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

Epistemology and Computer Science

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

This question may only be answerable by someone who understands computer science. I'm taking an introductory Java pogramming course and noticed a connection between Rand's theory of concepts and object-oriented computer programming. I understand an object to be an entity that has both behavior (essential characteristics) and data (meaasurements of those characteristics). When you write code for an object class, you're basically writing a blueprint for something that has some distinguishing characteristic(s) and can be used an infinite number of times with any number of possible measurements. Therefore, it seems that the field of computer science, without realizing it, applies the Objectivst theory of concepts as the basis of programming. Am I right about this?

Edited by iflyboats
Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://forum.ObjectivismOnline.com/index.php?showtopic=14948 is one thread on this topic.

There are similarities yes, but it's important to remember that writing code typically involves what you already know and want to accomplish, while concept formation involves discovering something new.

Edited by Eiuol
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What Eiuol said - and it bears pointing out that OOP is relatively new. Prior to the development of OOP, programs were linear in nature. OOP was developed as a technique to allow programming to model our thinking, making it easier for us to think about our programs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

The topic thread cited above provided a link that is now broken. It is no longer on The Atlas Society website. Adam Reed's essay "Object-Oriented Programming and Objectivist Epistemology: Parallels and Implications" from The Journal of Ayn Rand Studies Volume 4, No. 2 - Spring 2003 Issue #8 can now be found here: http://www.calstatela.edu/faculty/areed2/other/4-ar.pdf Adam Reed teaches computer science at Cal State Los Angeles.

The intersecting sets of computerists and Objectivists is not accidental. There are cultural reasons for this. No govenment licenses, regulations, permissions, or taxes apply to computering. You can be a programmer just by claiming to be one. (Proof is a different matter.) Regardless of construction materials or manufacturing methods, you can claim that your device is a computer. (Again, proof may await.) So, computering attracted people who with those political preferences.

Also, of course, computering is mental work in the extreme. So, it appeals to people who value their minds.

Logic is the foundaiton and the applications tend to the sciences - though art and music are known, as well.

For all of that, though, the correlation is not accidental or cultural, but metaphysical: A is A; Either-or; Non-contradiction. The bit is on or it is off. 0 or 1. Low or High. False or True.

Even so-called fuzzy logic and parallel processes depend at root on non-contradictory binary identifications.

With the highest level of abstractions - Object Oriented Programming - you can only make a mess of things by attempting to ignore the axioms of identity. That means, exactly, if you have a bug, it is because you have a contradiction.

Edited by Hermes
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...