Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-ndmmz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-25T12:50:48.436Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Computational theories should be made with natural language instead of meaningless code

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 October 2023

Peter DeScioli Open the ORCID record for Peter DeScioli [Opens in a new window]
Peter DeScioli*
Affiliation:
Department of Political Science, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, NY, USA pdescioli@gmail.com; pdescioli.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The target article claims that we should speak in code to understand property, because natural language is too ambiguous. Yet the best computer programmers tell us the opposite: Arbitrary code is too ambiguous, so we should use natural language for variables, functions, and classes. I discuss how meaningless code makes Boyer's theory too enigmatic to properly debate.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 46 , 2023 , e332
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Axelrod, R. (1984). The evolution of cooperation. Basic Books.Google Scholar
Boyer, P. (2015). How natural selection shapes conceptual structure: Human intuitions and concepts of ownership. In Laurence, S. & Margolis, E. (Eds.), The conceptual mind (pp. 185–200). New Directions in the Study of Concepts, The MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boyer, P. (2018). Minds make societies. Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Martin, R. C. (2009). Clean code. Pearson Education.Google Scholar