LOGO-L> Re: Report on Lego

[mikedoyle@cix.compulink.co.uk (Mike Doyle)]

In-Reply-To: <199802222232.OAA06691@anarres.CS.Berkeley.EDU>
So, in practice, is Control Lab - I know this because I was involved with 
LEGO Dacta during its development phase. In most schools kids simply bang 
on a load of on-screen meters and write about what happened when they did 
their 'experiment' with the sensors. 

Language-oriented computerists may be disturbed by this. However, if we 
look at the LEGO tradition we find a consistent use of pictorial, 
non-linguistic instructions. In moving away from Logo to a more 
pictographic approach to the control of their toy, LEGO are returning to a 
more internally intellectually consistent visual approach. Moreover, we 
must not forget that pictographic writing has a very long history and is 
capable of considerable subtlety of expression.

The only effective counter to the surface consistency of the LEGO graphic 
approach would entail:
a. clearly demonstrating that the LEGO graphic elements were really 
pseudo-graphic and based on language, and
b. accepting that the computer is a writing instrument. 

The latter, however, would place the concept of 'artificial intelligence' 
in the same frame as the medieval belief that written books were, of 
themselves, intelligent.

Micheal O Duill

---------------------------------------------------------------
Please post messages to the Logo forum to logo-l@gsn.org.  Mail
questions about the list administration to logofdn@gsn.org.  To
unsubscribe send    unsubscribe logo-l    to majordomo@gsn.org.