Imperial Cancer Research Fund Laboratories, London. "Men cannot be reconciled by appealing to their rational minds, only by appealing to their hearts" Robert.
JUDGEMENT, POLICY AND THE HARMONY MACHINE
John Fox I m p e r i a l Cancer Research Fund L a b o r a t o r i e s ,
"Men cannot be r e c o n c i l e d by a p p e a l i n g t o t h e i r r a t i o n a l minds, o n l y b y a p p e a l i n g t o t h e i r h e a r t s " Robert Owen, quoted on a p l a q u e at New Harmony, Illinois. Science and t e c h n o l o g y c o n f e r t h e i r b e n e f i t s t h r o u g h our u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f t h e w o r l d , and t h e consequent a b i l i t y t o choose a c t i o n s w h i c h l i m i t i t s u n p l e a s a n t a s p e c t s o r enhance i t s p l e a s a n t ones. The n a t u r a l s c i e n c e s and t h e i r t e c h n o l o g i c a l o f f s p r i n g have produced methods and d e v i c e s w h i c h , on b a l a n c e , have made t h e w o r l d more p r e d i c t a b l e , more c o n t r o l l a b l e and more comfortable. Broadly speaking these f e a t u r e s of p r e d i c t a b i l i t y and c o n t r o l l a b i l i t y a r e g r e a t e s t i n our d e a l i n g s w i t h t h e physical world. I n b i o l o g i c a l systems they are, as y e t , less evident. In s o c i a l systems and p e r s o n a l a f f a i r s u n c e r t a i n t y i s dominant. The successes o f t h e n a t u r a l s c i e n c e s and t h e g r o w i n g successes o f t h e l i f e s c i e n c e s have encouraged many p e o p l e to ask whether we can a c h i e v e comparable l e v e l s o f c o n t r o l over s o c i a l e v e n t s , and even our p r i v a t e l i v e s , t h r o u g h t h e use o f r a t i o n a l , s c i e n t i f i c t e c h n i q u e s . L i b e r a l , s o c i e t i e s t r a d i t i o n a l l y leave t h e s e m a t t e r s t o human judgement. It is my judgement whether or n o t I s h o u l d seek a m e d i c a l t r e a t m e n t , o r p r i v a t e education f o r my c h i l d r e n . It is at the d i s c r e t i o n o f company e x e c u t i v e s t o pursue new m a r k e t s or d e v e l o p new products. I t i s t h e judgements o f governments and t h e i r o f f i c e r s whether p o l i c i e s should be e s t a b l i s h e d which t u r n o n c e r t a i n economic i n d i c e s , o r w h i c h i n t r o d u c e i n d u s t r i a l changes w i t h s o c i a l or environmental i m p l i c a t i o n s , or which determine r u l e s o f c i t i z e n s h i p . Most p e o p l e v i e w judgement as
London
something a k i n t o a r t and n o t s c i e n c e . A contemporary v i e w i s t h a t i t i s amenable t o a r t i c u l a t e , r a t i o n a l a n a l y s i s which could lead t o b e t t e r d e c i s i o n s and, c o n s e q u e n t l y , g r e a t e r p e r s o n a l c o n t e n t m e n t and l e s s c o n f l i c t between i n d i v i d u a l s and g r o u p s . THE ART OF JUDGEMENT When f a c e d w i t h a b a l d c h a l l e n g e we may d e f e n d i n d i v i d u a l and p r o f e s s i o n a l judgement, n o t a b l y our own, b u t i t i s not r e l i a b l e . Judgement i s n o b e t t e r t h a n t h e i n f o r m a t i o n i t i s based upon, o r t h e mind t h a t f o r m u l a t e s i t . We cannot always r e l y upon our own judgement t o make t h e r i g h t d e c i s i o n s i n our l i v e s , o r upon t h e c o l l e c t i v e judgement o f o t h e r s t o make t h e r i g h t d e c i s i o n s f o r o u r s o c i e t y . We make m i s t a k e s and i t i s o n l y t h e t o l e r a n c e o f o t h e r s and t h e f l e x i b i l i t y o f s o c i a l i n s t i t u t i o n s t h a t p r e v e n t s many o f our m i s t a k e s b e i n g c o s t l y . I t i s n a t u r a l t h e r e f o r e t o use t o o l s , such a s computers, t o c o l l a t e and r e f i n e i n f o r m a t i o n p r i o r t o making judgements. Some argue t h a t we s h o u l d go f u r t h e r and r e l y upon r a t i o n a l c a l c u l a t i o n i n p r e f e r e n c e t o judgement. The l a s t t h i r t y y e a r s o r s o have seen t h e development o f q u a n t i t a t i v e t e c h n i q u e s i n p s y c h o l o g y , s o c i o l o g y , e c o l o g y and economics whose forms a r e r e m i n i s c e n t of t h o s e employed i n t h e n a t u r a l s c i e n c e s . B e h a v i o u r a l s c i e n t i s t s argue t h a t human d e c i s i o n making and p e r s o n a l judgements are a l l too f r e q u e n t l y ' i r r a t i o n a l ' b y comparison w i t h t h e p r e s c r i p t i o n s o f s c i e n t i f i c d e c i s i o n t h e o r y , and t h a t w e would b e w i s e t o e v a l u a t e our o t i o n s mathematically. Proponents o f n u c l e a r power a t t a c k opponents w i t h b u n d l e s o f c a l c u l a t i o n s o f ' r i s k ' . Operations r e s e a r c h t e c h n i q u e s a r e used t o c a l c u l a t e t h e manpower needs of companies and t o p l a n complex i n d u s t r i a l o r m i l i t a r y p r o j e c t s . The i n f l u e n c e o f economic models o n n a t i o n a l p o l i c i e s i s w e l l known.
J. Fox
C l e a r l y we can use i n f o r m a t i o n more e f f e c t i v e l y t o make p e r s o n a l and s o c i a l j u d g e m e n t s , and we s h o u l d e x p l o r e t h e use o f i n f o r m a t i o n t e c h n o l o g y t o d o t h a t . However t h e dominance o f q u a n t i t a t i v e methods may be m i s t a k e n . Some of my c o m p l a i n t s a r e t e c h n i c a l o b j e c t i o n s but I s h a l l not go i n t o these much h e r e . R a t h e r I want to suggest t h a t q u a l i t a t i v e methods, such a s t h o s e p i o n e e r e d i n A I , c o u l d r a d i c a l l y change our u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f , and competence i n , t h e processes o f s o c i a l judgement. THE LIMITS OF MATHEMATICS One way or a n o t h e r most ' r a t i o n a l ' techniques f o r dealing w i t h personal, e c o l o g i c a l , economic and p o l i t i c a l q u e s t i o n s depend upon m a t h e m a t i c a l p r o b a b i l i t y t h e o r y and s t a t i s t i c s . The technical attraction of probabilistic methods, u n l i k e t h e t r a d i t i o n a l d e t e r m i n i s t i c techniques of physics, is t h a t t h e y d o n o t t r y t o squeeze uncertainty out of complexity, only to g e t t h e measure o f i t . U s i n g s t a t i s t i c s we can make p r e d i c t i o n s in t h e f a c e of u n c e r t a i n t y , and p r o v i d e a r a t i o n a l b a s i s f o r i n d i v i d u a l d e c i s i o n s and s o c i a l p o l i c i e s . We can c a l c u l a t e our 'expected u t i l i t y ' of a s u r g i c a l operation, the ' r i s k ' of ecological disaster, the ' i n f l a t i o n a r y pressure' of a p u b l i c s p e n d i n g programme. Strong advocates o f such methods b e l i e v e t h a t r a t i o n a l judgement must be founded on r a t i o n a l m a t h e m a t i c s , and t h a t i t s w i d e s p r e a d use must l e a d t o g r e a t e r individual satisfaction, industrial e f f i c i e n c y and s o c i a l harmony. Critics c o n s i d e r them n a i v e . There a r e many t a c i t c r i t i c s . Although mathematical t o o l s are available for dealing with individual and s o c i a l q u e s t i o n s most o f u s d o n ' t use them at a l l . The t e c h n i q u e s can be e f f e c t i v e , so why d o n ' t we use them? I suggest f o u r r e l a t e d r e a s o n s . I shall l e a v e a s i d e t h e f a c t t h a t most o f u s d o n ' t know how t o use them. If t h a t were a l l t h e r e were t o i t t h e n presumably most of us would be happy to employ s p e c i a l i s t c o n s u l t a n t s i f i t seemed advantageous. The reasons f o r t h e d o u b t s about mathematics t h a t I p r e f e r have t o d o w i t h what p e o p l e u n d e r s t a n d , and what t h e y b e l i e v e and do as a consequence. The f i r s t o b s e r v a t i o n i s t h a t mathematics i s a b s t r a c t . It ignores,
1285
q u i t e d e l i b e r a t e l y , t h e meaning o f t h e e v e n t s i t d e a l s w i t h and c o n c e n t r a t e s o n the formal s t r u c t u r e o f problems. It ignores the idiosyncrasies of the s i t u a t i o n and i t s p a r t i c i p a n t s , and i t ignores d e t a i l s of organisational or s o c i a l c o n t e x t s w h i c h can e x e r t p o w e r f u l influences on the very i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of a p r o b l e m , as w e l l as on t h e form of an acceptable s o l u t i o n . The r i s k o f a n u c l e a r d i s a s t e r may be c a l c u l a b l y remote, b u t t h a t i s i r r e l e v a n t i f m y concern i s w i t h t h e competence o f engineering c o n t r a c t o r s , the standard of r o u t i n e maintenance, o r t h e p o s s i b i l i t y t h a t p l u t o n i u m may f a l l i n t o t h e wrong hands. Second, mathematics i s u n i n t e l l i g i b l e t o most o f u s . T h i s i s n o t j u s t because we l a c k some e d u c a t i o n , b u t more i m p o r t a n t i t i s a consequence o f i t s abstractness. The s t a t i s t i c s on smoking are c o n c l u s i v e , b u t t h e e f f e c t o n smokers has been l i m i t e d . The T r e a s u r y ' s model of t h e economy m i g h t be as good a p r e d i c t i v e d e v i c e as humanity can d e v e l o p b u t c i t i z e n s c a n ' t see how, o r i f , t h e model r e f l e c t s t h e r i s e o r d e c l i n e o f economic a c t i v i t i e s t h a t a f f e c t them. We j u s t d o n ' t u n d e r s t a n d models t h a t depend upon t h e i n t e r a c t i o n of f i f t y parameters. I n e f f e c t w e have no basis f o r assessing the personal i m p l i c a t i o n s o f such c a l c u l a t i o n s , and they are i n e v i t a b l y disregarded i n i n d i v i d u a l s ' p e r s o n a l , p o l i t i c a l and economic b e h a v i o u r . T h i r d l y , and consequent upon t h i s l a c k o f i n t e l l i g i b i l i t y , many o f u s cannot t r u s t t h o s e who d e f i n e ' r a t i o n a l s o c i a l p o l i c i e s ' even i f w e s h o u l d . If we a c c e p t t h e m a t h e m a t i c s , w i t h o u t u n d e r s t a n d i n g , we a c c e p t t h e power of t e c h n i c a l e l i t e s t o decide matters t h a t a f f e c t us w i t h o u t being accountable to us. D i s a s t r o u s m e d i c a l a d v i c e can e a s i l y be dismissed as "the luck of the draw". The e f f e c t s of a bad r e g u l a t i o n o r economic p o l i c y " c o u l d n o t have been foreseen". Who can check? Claims t h a t professional ethics or public a c c o u n t a b i l i t y provide proper c o n t r o l s a r e j u s t seen a s s p e c i a l p l e a d i n g and s t a t u s quoism. Human judgement may be rough and r e a d y b u t i t has t h e huge p o l i t i c a l advantage t h a t i t can b e examined, and c h a l l e n g e d , i n t h e p u b l i c arena or a c o u r t of law because we share a common language f o r d i s c u s s i n g i t . In a p o l i t i c a l sense t h e most r a t i o n a l a t t i t u d e i s t o r e g a r d a n obscure t e c h n i c a l argument as s i m p l y a hostage to fortune.
1286 J. Fox
F i n a l l y t h e r e i s t h e a n c i e n t problem o f p e r s o n a l v a l u e s and i n t e r e s t s . I b e l i e v e t h a t t h e development o f much o f mathematics and t h e n a t u r a l s c i e n c e s would have a r r i v e d more o r l e s s a s i t i s i f t h e b e l i e f s , p o l i t i c s and v a l u e s o f t h e d i s c o v e r e r s had been d i f f e r e n t . We m i g h t have had a d i f f e r e n t s e l e c t i o n o f discoveries, but not a contradictory selection. This is c e r t a i n l y not t r u e o f p e r s o n a l judgement o r s o c i a l p o l i c y . E f f o r t s t o a c h i e v e harmony must recognise differences o f value. It is h e r e t h a t m a t h e m a t i c a l t e c h n i q u e s have been a t t h e i r w e a k e s t . T o b e s u r e t h e r e are • o b j e c t i v e 1 q u a n t i t a t i v e n o t i o n s o f p e r s o n a l u t i l i t y and economic r a t i o n a l i t y but they a r e , i n the view o f many, u n r e l i a b l e and u n c o n v i n c i n g . I conclude t h a t c e r t a i n aspects of human judgement a r e f l a w e d , b u t t h e m a t h e m a t i c a l t o o l s w h i c h may c l a i m t o c o r r e c t o r a s s i s t judgement a r e t o o abstract to substitute for it entirely, t o o u n i n t e l l i g i b l e f o r u s t o know what t h e y do and do n o t a d d r e s s , and t o o n e u t r a l to be confident t h a t they p r o t e c t our i n t e r e s t s r a t h e r than those of others. THE CONTRIBUTION OF AI S o what does a l l t h i s have t o d o w i t h A r t i f i c i a l Intelligence? A I claims t o o f f e r a r a d i c a l l y new framework f o r understanding the manifestations of i n t e l l i g e n c e . Judgement i s one such manifestation. Could A I o f f e r a d i f f e r e n t s o r t o f t e c h n o l o g y f o r making judgements t h a t i s more c o m p a t i b l e w i t h human u n d e r s t a n d i n g ? Could i t l e t u s b u i l d a new g e n e r a t i o n of harmony machines w i t h o u t t h e v i c e s o f t h e o l d ? The most p r o m i n e n t p r a c t i c a l development i n A r t i f i c i a l I n t e l l i g e n c e s o f a r has been t h e i n t r o d u c t i o n o f e x p e r t systems. E x p e r t systems, i t i s s a i d , use 'knowledge' t o g i v e a s s i s t a n c e i n s p e c i a l i s e d problem s o l v i n g and d e c i s i o n m a k i n g . Many p e o p l e see knowledge based systems as p r o v i d i n g new c a p a b i l i t i e s f o r making d e c i s i o n s , i n t e r p r e t i n g i n f o r m a t i o n , p l a n n i n g and d e s i g n i n g , and even making s c i e n t i f i c and commercial i n n o v a t i o n s . Some see a r o l e f o r knowledge based systems i n t h e f o r m u l a t i o n o f law and s o c i a l legislation.
The t e c h n i c a l c a p a b i l i t i e s o f e x p e r t systems a r e p r o b a b l y o n l y a l i t t l e ahead, and in some ways b e h i n d , t h e c a p a b i l i t i e s o f c l a s s i c a l mathematical systems. The i m p o r t a n c e of knowledge based systems, however, i s n o t t h e i r c u r r e n t achievements b u t i n t h e way t h a t t h e y s o l v e problems and some s i d e e f f e c t s o f t h e t e c h n i q u e s t h e y use rather than t h e i r current c a p a b i l i t i e s . These f e a t u r e s m i g h t address t h e t h e problems t h a t I have o u t l i n e d . E x p e r t systems emphasise knowledge, n o t numbers. AI w o r k e r s have an i d e a o f what knowledge i s , o r a t l e a s t a p a r t i a l one. The i n f o r m a t i o n t h a t a n e x p e r t system uses i s p r i m a r i l y q u a l i t a t i v e , i n c l u d i n g • f a c t s ' such as: hopelessness is a cause of social and • r u l e s *
alienation
like:
if
C l i e n t i s unemployed and p e r i o d of unemployment of C l i e n t is long and o p p o r t u n i t y o f employment i s low then r i s k of s o c i a l a l i e n a t i o n of Client is high (The s y n t a x o f t h e s e f r a g m e n t s i s t h a t of t h e PROPS package developed at t h e I m p e r i a l Cancer Research Fund. C a p i t a l i s e d terms a r e v a r i a b l e s . ) There a r e s e v e r a l consequences o f r e p r e s e n t i n g knowledge i n t h i s way. F i r s t , t h e emphasis o n q u a l i t a t i v e f a c t s and r u l e s o f thumb expresses f a i r l y d i r e c t l y what w e know, o r a t l e a s t what we t h i n k we know. Q u a l i t a t i v e statements are imprecise, but they r e f l e c t ordinary t h i n k i n g . Precision is often an i l l u s i o n or i r r e l e v a n t anyway. B r i a n Gaines has a n i c e comment t h a t t h e r e i s l i t t l e p o i n t i n s a y i n g t h a t something " w i l l b e d e l i v e r e d at g a t e no 5 at 10.00 on Saturday m o r n i n g " when a l l you mean i s i t " w i l l b e dropped o f f round t h e back over t h e weekend". The a p p a r e n t p r e c i s i o n o f c a l c u l a t i o n may m e r e l y g i v e an a i r of r a t i o n a l i t y without i t s substance. E x t e n s i o n s o f such i d e a s l e t u s r e p r e s e n t t h e meaning o f t h e concepts r e f e r r e d t o i n t h e r u l e s and f a c t s . A s more and more r u l e s and f a c t s about "unemployment", " o p p o r t u n i t y " , " s o c i a l
J. Fox
a l i e n a t i o n " a r e added t h e computer becomes more and more a b l e to use t h e c o n c e p t s i n ways w h i c h a r e i s o m o r p h i c w i t h t h e ways i n w h i c h w e use them. I f t h e c o n c e p t s a r e complex and v a r i e d , then the computer's representation of them i s complex and v a r i e d . The a b i l i t y t o r e p r e s e n t t h e d e t a i l s and i d i o s y n c r a s i e s o f t h e problem i s g r e a t e r than if we l i m i t ourselves to formal i d e a l i s e d models. D r e y f u s , Weizenbaum and S e a r l e , deny t h a t t h i s i s " t r u e meaning" i n a human sense, b u t even i f t h i s i s c o r r e c t , w h i c h many q u e s t i o n , i t i s a n o b s e r v a t i o n w h i c h may have l i t t l e f o r c e . I f t h e computer behaves i n such a way t h a t p e o p l e can u n d e r s t a n d and even p r e d i c t t h e n t h e p r a c t i c a l consequences are t h a t i t s a c t i o n s are i n t e l l i g i b l e . This i n t e l l i g i b i l i t y is a p i v o t a l p o i n t f o r t h e p r e s e n t argument, a s w e l l as e x p e r t systems g e n e r a l l y . We may c o n s i d e r t h e s e f r a g m e n t s o f knowledge, and a s s e r t t h a t t h e y a r e s i m p l i s t i c , i n c o n s e q u e n t i a l o r j u s t p l a i n wrong. Quite p o s s i b l y , but l i t t l e or no t r a i n i n g i n computer s c i e n c e i s r e q u i r e d t o u n d e r s t a n d , and t h e r e f o r e c h a l l e n g e , t h e judgements t h e y embody. A l t h o u g h t h e y a r e i n e f f e c t fragments o f a computer p r o g r a m , t h e y a r e i n t e l l i g i b l e f r a g m e n t s t h a t can be examined and debated. A side e f f e c t of representing knowledge i n t h i s way i s t h a t t h e computer system becomes a c c o u n t a b l e to t h o s e i t a f f e c t s . I t i s w e l l known t h a t one o f t h e f e a t u r e s o f e x p e r t systems i s t h a t t h e y can g i v e e x p l a n a t i o n s . If I want to know how a c o n c l u s i o n or recommendation i s a r r i v e d a t I can ask. The computer must r e p o r t t h e f a c t s t h a t i t assumed and t h e l i n e o f r e a s o n i n g i t followed. Admittedly c u r r e n t techniques of e x p l a n a t i o n are p r i m i t i v e but they w i l l improve - and my e x p e r i e n c e is t h a t a n e x p e r t s y s t e m ' s clumsy a t t e m p t s a t e x p l a n a t i o n a r e more u n d e r s t a n d a b l e t h a n many l e g a l documents t h a t I e n c o u n t e r . Knowledge based systems w i l l be more c r e d i b l y competent, o r o p e n l y l a u g h a b l e , than t h e i r predecessors. The p o t e n t i a l f o r argument, c h a l l e n g e and t h e e x e r c i s e o f i n d i v i d u a l d i s c r e t i o n are t h e r e b y i n c r e a s e d , and t h e commissioners, d e s i g n e r s and o p e r a t o r s o f t h e machinery of p o l i c y become more a c c o u n t a b l e . I n t e r e s t i n g l y , the habit of explanation could be c a t c h i n g . Refusal of insurance cover; i m p o s i t i o n o f zoning r e g u l a t i o n s ; t a x a t i o n demands; d e n i a l o f p r o m o t i o n o r c i t i z e n s h i p ; p u b l i c statements o f
1287
changes t o f i s c a l p o l i c y , o r announcements o f p u b l i c w o r k s , would i n c r e a s i n g l y be expected to be accompanied b y i n t e l l i g i b l e documents o f explanation. A f u t u r e Freedom of I n f o r m a t i o n A c t m i g h t i n s i s t upon i t . F i n a l l y , how do we a n a l y s e i n d i v i d u a l v a l u e s ? We c a n ' t , at l e a s t n o t e n t i r e l y . A I does n o t s o l v e a l l t h e deep problems o f p h i l o s o p h y . However even i f our u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f such m a t t e r s i s s k e t c h y , a knowledge based system c o u l d s t i l l allow f o r ( i f not f u l l y comprehend) i n d i v i d u a l v a l u e s o r a t t i t u d e s . To g i v e j u s t one example we m i g h t imagine a home computer a s k i n g " w h i c h i s more i m p o r t a n t t o y o u , h a v i n g y o u r baby at home near y o u r f a m i l y and f r i e n d s , o r w i t h i n reach o f t r a i n e d s t a f f i n case o f problems?" and r e f l e c t i n g t h e answer i n i t s a d v i c e . I t h i n k t h i s a l l b o i l s down t o t h e p o s s i b i l i t y t h a t , c o n t r a r y t o many expectations, AI could be a l i b e r a t i n g f o r c e . The i n f l u e n c e o f t e c h n o l o g y and t h e mechanical h a n d l i n g o f i n f o r m a t i o n are growing at a r a p i d r a t e . Many o f these i n f l u e n c e s are hidden by v i r t u e of their incomprehensibility. A I , properly managed, c o u l d l e a d to needed checks and balances i n a t e c h n o l o g y based s o c i e t y , and more p a r t i c i p a t i o n b y i t s members i n the formation of p o l i c i e s . CONCLUSIONS AND CAVEATS As we a r e i n c r e a s i n g l y dominated by c o m p l e x i t y and change we need h e l p to p r e d i c t and c o n t r o l t h e i r consequences. One response i s t o i n t r o d u c e r a t i o n a l mathematical t o o l s . But b y themselves t h e s e t o o l s a r e t o o a l i e n t o g a i n much g r o u n d , and where t h e y a r e used t h e y a r e l i a b l e t o improper o r u n a c c o u n t a b l e u s e . There a r e areas where t e c h n i q u e can enhance judgement and p o l i c y m a k i n g , b u t technique w i l l only b e acceptable i f i t r e f l e c t s human u n d e r s t a n d i n g and i s a c c o u n t a b l e t o human a u t h o r i t y . It is w o r t h e x p l o r i n g what A I t e c h n i q u e s have to offer. However t h e huge g r o w t h o f i n t e r e s t i n A I has n o t been d r i v e n b y l i b e r a l a s p i r a t i o n s , b u t b y commercial ones. Many o f u s f e e l t h a t t h i s has unbalanced i t s d e v e l o p m e n t . Most o f t h e t e c h n i c a l community i s f a r more i n t e r e s t e d i n t h e new c a p a b i l i t i e s , t h e new e f f i c i e n c i e s and t h e new m a r k e t s t h a t A I seems t o o f f e r than the s o c i a l b e n e f i t s . Although the a d m i n i s t r a t o r s of research programmes and o r g a n i s a t i o n s e s t a b l i s h e d
1288 J. Fox
t o f o s t e r t h e development o f A I appear t o b e sympathetic t o the idea t h a t i t should be e x p l o i t e d f o r s o c i a l as w e l l a s economic b e n e f i t t h e response from t e c h n i c a l , s o c i a l s c i e n c e and p o l i t i c a l groups has been d i s a p p o i n t i n g . I hope t h a t the IJCAI panel w i l l c o n t r i b u t e t o altering this. I do n o t suggest t h a t t h e necessary A I developments a r e around t h e c o r n e r o r w i l l be e a s i l y achieved. I t must b e said that AI is subject to p o l i t i c a l d i r e c t i o n and management, and i t s a p p l i c a t i o n t o s o c i a l l y v a l u a b l e aims w i l l have t o b e c o n s c i o u s l y encouraged. The l i b e r a l i s a t i o n t h a t I t h i n k A I c o u l d d e l i v e r would a l s o b e a p a i n f u l d i s c i p l i n e f o r our m a s t e r s ; t h e y may p r e f e r obscure m a t h e m a t i c s , o r n o t h i n g at a l l . ACKNOWLEDGEMENT I w i s h to t h a n k Maggie Boden f o r i n v i t i n g m e t o p r e p a r e t h i s p a p e r , and to take the o p p o r t u n i t y of drawing a t t e n t i o n t o h e r own paper i n t h e J o u r n a l o f M a t h e m a t i c a l S o c i o l o g y , 1984, 9 , p p 3 4 1 - 356, w h i c h d e a l s w i t h r a t h e r s i m i l a r themes.
