Turing Legacy Bologna Feb 2020

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Turing Legacy Bologna Feb 2020 04/03/20 Alan Turing: l’intelligenza come attività sociale Teresa Numerico [email protected] 20 febbraio 2020 – Università di Bologna 1 1 Introduzione 2 2 1 04/03/20 Alan Turing } Nasce nel 1912 a Londra } Nel 1936 ottiene il famoso risultato di logica noto come tesi di Church-Turing mentre si trova al King’s College di Cambridge } Nel biennio autunno 1936-autunno 1938 studia a Princeton in US con Alonzo Church. Lì incontra tra gli altri von Neumann che si interessa al suo lavoro e gli chiede di restare in America come suo assistente, ma Turing si rifiuta } Durante gli anni della II Guerra Mondiale si occupa della decodifica di Enigma, la macchina elettromeccanica dei Tedeschi per trasmettere messaggi in codice } Dal 1945 lavora al NPL al progetto per costruire un calcolatore a programma memorizzato, l’ACE } Tra il 1947 e il ’48 trascorre un anno sabbatico a Cambridge } Dal ’48 al ’54 si trasferisce a Manchester e si occupa del Mark I un calcolatore progettato da F.Williams } Muore suicida nel 1954 a Manchester 3 Perché la Macchina di Turing è importante? } Perché negli anni ’40 la macchina costituirà un modello teorico per la costruzione dei calcolatori di nuova generazione a programma memorizzato e general-purpose } Perché fornisce un modello generale e intuitivo della nozione di calcolabilità, che non è ancora stato confutato } Perché manda definitivamente in crisi il modello di conoscenza basato esclusivamente sulla logica matematica, pur essendone la sua espressione finale 4 2 04/03/20 Una nozione di logica: la decidibilità } Un sistema formale è decidibile se esiste un metodo che in un numero finito di passi permette di riconoscere, per ogni formula espressa linguaggio nel sistema, se appartiene all’insieme dei teoremi del sistema o no. Un metodo, quindi, che stabilisca in linea di principio se esiste una dimostrazione per quella formula o no. 5 Un nuovo modo di porre il problema della decisione } Dopo i risultati di Gödel, restava da risolvere il problema della decisione, che nella formulazione di Turing era posto in questi termini: } è possibile avere un metodo meccanico che in un numero finito di passi permetta di riconoscere se una formula espressa nel linguaggio di un sistema formale appartiene o non appartiene all’insieme dei teoremi del sistema? 6 3 04/03/20 MT universale Turing (1939) definì così il risultato teorico: “Si affermò che "una funzione è effettivamente calcolabile se i suoi valori possono essere trovati attraverso un processo puramente meccanico". Possiamo prendere alla lettera questa asserzione, intendendo per processo puramente meccanico, un processo che può essere portato a termine da una macchina. E' possibile dare una descrizione matematica delle strutture di queste macchine.” 7 Che vuol dire metodo meccanico? } Secondo Turing un metodo meccanico è una procedura eseguita da un dispositivo meccanico, cioè da una macchina } Per dimostrare che questo metodo meccanico non esisteva, Turing doveva inventare la macchina più generale possibile e mostrare che nemmeno questa è adatta allo scopo 8 4 04/03/20 Ma che cos’è una macchina? } E’ difficile dare una definizione precisa di macchina. Per Turing è: } Lo strumento più generale che si può usare per effettuare calcoli Ma } I calcoli sono solo manipolazione di simboli Allora } La macchina è lo strumento più generale e più elementare in grado di manipolare simboli 9 A cosa serviva la macchina? } La Macchina di Turing serviva a proporre un modello formale dell’attività di un essere umano che esegue un calcolo di tipo algoritmico: } un dispositivo astratto in grado di emulare la funzione del calcolare, purché essa sia definita attraverso una successione di operazioni elementari. } L’attività di calcolo è una generica attività di manipolazione di simboli e non semplicemente di effettuare operazioni aritmetiche 10 5 04/03/20 La Macchina di Turing } Durante la primavera del 1936, Turing inventò la macchina più generale mai concepita, e probabilmente mai concepibile. } Il dispositivo era dotato solo di: } un nastro bidimensionale diviso in quadrati di lunghezza finita ma illimitata } un dispositivo per la lettura, scrittura, eliminazione di simboli e spostamento sul nastro } una tavola di istruzioni comprensibile alla macchina che indicava tutte le attività da svolgere senza ambiguità e tutti gli stati in cui macchina poteva trovarsi 11 Lo schema di una MT | | Dispositivo di lettura/scrittura/cancellazione spostamento sul nastro secondo la tavola delle istruzioni 12 6 04/03/20 Perché T. ha bisogno della macchina per dimostrare l’indecidibilità? 1. Turing “dimostrò” che, se un compito era eseguibile da una macchina, allora era “simulabile” esisteva un particolare tipo di Macchina di Turing, che lo poteva simulare 2. Turing dimostrò che esistono calcoli che non possono essere effettuati, manipolazioni di simboli che non vanno a buon fine, procedure che non hanno mai termine anche per una MT 3. Il problema della decisione è uno dei calcoli che non è possibile effettuare con una MT 13 Calcolabilità umana e meccanica } L’identificazione di computabilità effettiva e T-calcolabilità è una tesi non un teorema, e doveva essere argomentata dal momento che non poteva essere dimostrata } I limiti ai quali la macchina era sottoposta servivano per metterla in condizione di emulare l’attività umana di calcolo } La macchina poteva così sostituire un “calcolatore” umano in qualunque sua operazione 14 7 04/03/20 La MT universale come macchina simulatrice } La MT emula il comportamento delle altre macchine attraverso una tavola di istruzioni, inserita nella macchina come se fossero i suoi dati } La MT è una macchina general-purpose, capace di svolgere qualsiasi compito } La MT è perciò una macchina virtuale } La MT è l’insieme di struttura e tavola di istruzioni: Hardware + Software 18 La calcolabilità e l’agente onnisciente isolato } L’emulazione dell’attività di calcolo umana realizzata attraverso una macchina presuppone un modello, un certo approccio alla conoscenza: } Le operazioni della computazione si svolgono senza bisogno dell’apporto dell’ambiente o di altri soggetti esterni al calcolo } Non ci sono sorprese nell’esecuzione delle operazioni: data una tavola di istruzioni e una serie di stati della macchina il risultato è costante e immutabile } Tutta la conoscenza necessaria al risultato è presente nell’agente che esegue le operazioni in modo non ambiguo ed è priva di incoerenze 19 8 04/03/20 L’accelerazione della II Guerra Mondiale } La necessità di calcoli molto complessi era particolarmente sentita in vari campi: } La ricerca atomica: calcoli per misurare le caratteristiche esatte dell’esplosione e della posizione del materiale intorno alla fissione } La ricerca balistica: equazioni differenziali non lineari per la misurazione delle tavole di lancio delle armi a lunga gittata. } La crittografia 20 Von Neumann e l’influenza di Turing } Von Neumann aveva incontrato sicuramente Turing a Princeton, restando colpito dal suo valore } Era al corrente del modello logico di calcolo proposto con la macchina universale } Applica l’idea alla costruzione di un calcolatore reale: } Nella memoria (simile al nastro bidimensionale) risiedevano dati e programmi } C’era un unico controllo logico che, sulla base della tavola di istruzioni (programma), gestiva in modo centralizzato tutte le operazioni in successione } Esistevano organi di input e di output (che nella MTU erano porzioni del nastro) 21 9 04/03/20 Sintesi } L’intelligenza e l’importanza dell’esternalizzazione della memoria } La doppia natura del linguaggio nella prima era dell’intelligenza artificiale e il ruolo dell’errore nell’apprendimento } Il test di Turing o l’intelligenza come fatto sociale } Cognitive vs data-driven machine learning (la modernità di Turing) 22 22 Il ruolo della memoria secondo Alan Turing 23 10 04/03/20 I calcolatori umani e la loro controparte meccanica /macchina di Turing/1 } The behaviour of the computer at any moment is determined by the symbols which he is observing, and his “state of mind” at that moment. […] } Let us imagine the operations performed by the computer to be split up into “simple operations” which are so elementary that it is not easy to imagine them further divided. } Every such operation consists of some change of the physical system consisting of the computer and his tape. […] } We may construct a machine to do the work of this computer. To each “state of mind” of the computer corresponds an “m-configuration” o the machine Turing 1936/2004, pp. 75-77 24 I calcolatori umani e la loro controparte meccanica /macchina di Turing 2 } We avoid introducing the "state of mind" by considering a more physical and definite counterpart of it. } It is always possible for the computer to break off from his work, to go away and forget all about it, and later come back and go on with it. } If he does this he must leave a note of instructions (written in some standard form) explaining how the work is to be continued. This note is the counterpart of the "state of mind". } We will suppose that the computer works in such a desultory manner that he never does more than one step at a sitting. The note of instructions must enable him to carry out one step and write the next note. } Thus the state of progress of the computation at any stage is completely determined by the note of instructions and the symbols on the tape. Turing 1936/2004, 79 25 25 11 04/03/20 La teoria di Turing sulla memoria per l’intelligenza } The machine would incorporate a memory. This does not need very much explanation. It would simply be a list of all the statements that had been made to it or by it, and all the moves it had made ant the cards it had played in its games. This would be listed in chronological order.
Recommended publications
  • Association of Jewish Libraries N E W S L E T T E R February/March 2008 Volume XXVII, No
    Association of Jewish Libraries N E W S L E T T E R February/March 2008 Volume XXVII, No. 3 JNUL Officially Becomes The National Library of Israel ELHANAN ADL E R On November 26, 2007, The Knesset enacted the “National Li- assistance of the Yad Hanadiv foundation, which previously brary Law,” transforming the Jewish National and University contributed the buildings of two other state bodies: the Knesset, Library (JNUL) at The Hebrew University’s Givat Ram campus and the Supreme Court. The new building will include expanded into the National Library of Israel. reading rooms and state-of-the-art storage facilities, as well as The JNUL was founded in 1892 by the Jerusalem Lodge of a planned Museum of the Book. B’nai B’rith. After the first World War, the library’s ownership The new formal status and the organizational change will was transferred to the World Zionist Organization. With the enable the National Library to expand and to serve as a leader opening of the Hebrew University on the Mount Scopus campus in its scope of activities in Israel, to broaden its links with simi- in 1925, the library was reorganized into the Jewish National and lar bodies in the world, and to increase its resources via the University Library and has been an administrative unit of the government and through contributions from Israel and abroad. Hebrew University ever since. With the founding of the State The law emphasizes the role of the Library in using technology of Israel the JNUL became the de facto national library of Israel.
    [Show full text]
  • An Observation About Truth
    An Observation about Truth (with Implications for Meaning and Language) Thesis submitted for the degree of “Doctor of Philosophy” By David Kashtan Submitted to the Senate of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem November 2017 i This work was carried out under the supervision of: Prof. Carl Posy ii Racheli Kasztan-Czerwonogórze i Avigail Kasztan-Czerwonogórze i ich matce iii Acknowledgements I am the proximal cause of this dissertation. It has many distal causes, of which I will give only a partial list. During the several years in which this work was in preparation I was lucky to be supported by several sources. For almost the whole duration of my doctoral studies I was a funded doctoral fellow at the Language, Logic and Cognition Center. The membership in the LLCC has been of tremendous significance to my scientific education and to the final shape and content of this dissertation. I thank especially Danny Fox, from whom I learnt how linguistics is done (though, due to my stubbornness, not how to do it) and all the other members of this important place, past and present, and in particular Lital Myers who makes it all come together. In the years 2011-2013 I was a funded participant in an inter-university research and study program about Kantian philosophy. The program was organized by Ido Geiger and Yakir Levin from Ben-Gurion University, and by Eli Friedlander, Ofra Rechter and Yaron Senderowicz from Tel-Aviv University. The atmosphere in the program was one of intimacy and devotion to philosophy; I predict we will soon witness blossoms, the seeds of which were planted there.
    [Show full text]
  • YIVO Encyclopedia Published to Celebration and Acclaim Former
    YIVO Encyclopedia Published to Celebration and Acclaim alled “essential” and a “goldmine” in early reviews, The YIVO Encyclo- pedia of Jews in Eastern Europe was published this spring by Yale University Press. CScholars immediately hailed the two-volume, 2,400-page reference, the culmination of more than seven years of intensive editorial develop- ment and production, for its thoroughness, accuracy, and readability. YIVO began the celebrations surrounding the encyclopedia’s completion in March, just weeks after the advance copies arrived. On March 11, with Editor in Chief Gershon Hundert serving as moderator and respondent, a distinguished panel of “first readers”—scholars and writers who had not participated in the project—gave their initial reactions to the contents of the work. Noted author Allegra Goodman was struck by the simultaneous development, in the nineteenth century, of both Yiddish and Hebrew popular literature, with each trad- with which the contributors took their role in Perhaps the most enthusiastic remarks of the ing ascendance at different times. Marsha writing their articles. Dartmouth University evening came from Edward Kasinec, chief of Rozenblit of the University of Maryland noted professor Leo Spitzer emphasized that even the Slavic and Baltic Division of the New York that the encyclopedia, without nostalgia, pro- in this age of the Internet and Wikipedia, we Public Library, who said, “I often had the feeling vides insight into ordinary lives, the “very still need this encyclopedia for its informa- that Gershon Hundert and his many collabo- texture of Jewish life in Eastern Europe,” and tive, balanced, and unbiased treatment, unlike rators were like masters of a kaleidoscope, was impressed with the obvious seriousness much information found on the Web.
    [Show full text]
  • Turing and the Art of Classical Computability
    Turing and the Art of Classical Computability Robert Irving Soare Contents 1 Mathematics as an Art 1 2 Defining the Effectively Calculable Functions 2 3 Why Turing and not Church? 4 4 Why Michelangelo and not Donatello? 4 5 Classical Art and Classical Computability 6 6 Computability and Recursion 7 7 The Art of Exposition 8 8 Conclusion 8 1. Mathematics as an Art Mathematics is an art as well as a science. It is an art in the sense of a skill as in Donald Knuth's series, The Art of Computer Programming, but it is also an art in the sense of an esthetic endeavor with inherent beauty which is recognized by all mathematicians. One of the world's leading art treasures is Michelangelo's statue of David as a young man displayed in the Accademia Gallery in Florence. There is a long aisle to approach the statue of David. The aisle is flanked by the statues of Michelangelo's unfinished slaves struggling as if to emerge from the blocks of marble. These figures reveal Michelangelo's work process. There are practically no details, and yet they possess a weight and power beyond their physical proportions. Michelangelo thought of himself not as carving a statue but as seeing clearly the figure within the marble and then Preprint submitted to Elsevier July 15, 2011 chipping away the marble to release it. The unfinished slaves are perhaps a more revealing example of this talent than the finished statue of David. Similarly, it was Alan Turing [1936] and [1939] who saw the figure of computability in the marble more clearly than anyone else.
    [Show full text]
  • Implicit and Explicit Examples of the Phenomenon of Deviant Encodings
    STUDIES IN LOGIC, GRAMMAR AND RHETORIC 63 (76) 2020 DOI: 10.2478/slgr-2020-0027 This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution BY 4.0 License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0) Paula Quinon Warsaw University of Technology Faculty of Administration and Social Sciences International Center for Formal Ontology e-mail: [email protected] ORCID: 0000-0001-7574-6227 IMPLICIT AND EXPLICIT EXAMPLES OF THE PHENOMENON OF DEVIANT ENCODINGS Abstract. The core of the problem discussed in this paper is the following: the Church-Turing Thesis states that Turing Machines formally explicate the intuitive concept of computability. The description of Turing Machines requires description of the notation used for the INPUT and for the OUTPUT. Providing a general definition of notations acceptable in the process of computations causes problems. This is because a notation, or an encoding suitable for a computation, has to be computable. Yet, using the concept of computation, in a definition of a notation, which will be further used in a definition of the concept of computation yields an obvious vicious circle. The circularity of this definition causes trouble in distinguishing on the theoretical level, what is an acceptable notation from what is not an acceptable notation, or as it is usually referred to in the literature, “deviant encodings”. Deviant encodings appear explicitly in discussions about what is an ad- equate or correct conceptual analysis of the concept of computation. In this paper, I focus on philosophical examples where the phenomenon appears im- plicitly, in a “disguised” version. In particular, I present its use in the analysis of the concept of natural number.
    [Show full text]
  • Oron Shagrir
    Oron Shagrir Schulman Chair in Philosophy Professor of Philosophy and Cognitive Science The Hebrew University of Jerusalem [email protected] Mt. Scopus, Jerusalem, 91905, ISRAEL [email protected] AOS: Philosophy of cognitive/brain sciences; Philosophy of computing. AOC: Philosophy of mind; Metaphysics; Philosophy of science; Logic and computability; History of computing; Computational cognitive science. Education University of California, San Diego (1995): Ph.D. Philosophy and Cognitive Science. Advisor: Patricia Churchland. Hebrew University, Jerusalem (1989): M.A. History and Philosophy of Science (with honors). Advisor: Itamar Pitowsky. Hebrew University, Jerusalem (1986): B.Sc. Mathematics and Computer Science (with honors). Academic course Vice president (November 2017-present), Hebrew University. Acting rector (Fall 2017), Hebrew University. Vice rector (2013 – 2017), Hebrew University. Full professor (2013), Hebrew University. Associate professor (2008), Hebrew University. Visiting fellow (Fall 2009; Fall 2012; Fall 2016), University of Canterbury, New Zealand. Chairperson of Cognitive Science (2001-2004, 2005-2009), Hebrew University. Visiting fellow (Fall 2004), University of Pittsburgh. Senior lecturer (with tenure, 2003), Hebrew University. Lecturer, (1998), Hebrew University. Post-doctoral period (1995-1998), Hebrew University. Research grants Israel Science Foundation (2018-2022; grant 830/18); The Indeterminacy of Computation (collaborators: Nir Fresco and Jack Copeland), 752,000 ILS. German-Israeli Foundation for Scientific Research and Development (2015- 2018; GIF Research Grant No. G-1257-116.4/2014): Causation and Computation in Cognitive Neuroscience (with Jens Harbecke and Vera Hoffmann-Kolss), €180,000. Israel Science Foundation (2011-2015; grant 1509/11): Computation, Cognition, and the Brain: Philosophical Perspectives on Computational Neuroscience, $110,000. 2 Israel Science Foundation (2008-2011, grant 725/08): The Brain as A Computer, $60,000.
    [Show full text]
  • Oron Shagrir
    Oron Shagrir Schulman Chair in Philosophy Professor of Philosophy and Cognitive Science The Hebrew University of Jerusalem [email protected] Mt. Scopus, Jerusalem, 91905, ISRAEL [email protected] AOS: Philosophy of cognitive/brain sciences; Philosophy of computing. AOC: Philosophy of mind; Metaphysics; Philosophy of science; Logic and computability; History of computing; Computational cognitive science. Education University of California, San Diego (1995): Ph.D. Philosophy and Cognitive Science. Advisor: Patricia Churchland. Hebrew University, Jerusalem (1989): M.A. History and Philosophy of Science (with honors). Advisor: Itamar Pitowsky. Hebrew University, Jerusalem (1986): B.Sc. Mathematics and Computer Science (with honors). Academic course Vice president (November 2017-present), Hebrew University. Acting rector (Fall 2017), Hebrew University. Vice rector (2013 – 2017), Hebrew University. Full professor (2013), Hebrew University. Associate professor (2008), Hebrew University. Visiting fellow (Fall 2009; Fall 2012; Fall 2016; Fall 2020), University of Canterbury, New Zealand. Chairperson of Cognitive Science (2001-2004, 2005-2009), Hebrew University. Visiting fellow (Fall 2004), University of Pittsburgh. Senior lecturer (with tenure, 2003), Hebrew University. Lecturer, (1998), Hebrew University. Post-doctoral period (1995-1998), Hebrew University. Research grants Israel Science Foundation (2018-2022; grant 830/18); The Indeterminacy of Computation (collaborators: Nir Fresco and Jack Copeland), 638,000 ILS. German-Israeli Foundation for Scientific Research and Development (2015- 2018; GIF Research Grant No. G-1257-116.4/2014): Causation and Computation in Cognitive Neuroscience (Co-PIs: Jens Harbecke and Vera Hoffmann-Kolss), €‎180,000. Israel Science Foundation (2011-2015; grant 1509/11): Computation, Cognition, and the Brain: Philosophical Perspectives on Computational Neuroscience, $110,000.
    [Show full text]
  • KANT's PHILOSOPHY of MATHEMATICS Volume I
    Cambridge University Press 978-1-108-71708-3 — Kant's Philosophy of Mathematics Edited by Carl Posy , Ofra Rechter Frontmatter More Information KANT’S PHILOSOPHY OF MATHEMATICS Volume I: The Critical Philosophy and Its Roots The late s saw the emergence of new philosophical interest in Kant’s philosophy of mathematics, and since then this interest has developed into a major and dynamic field of study. In this state-of- the-art survey of contemporary scholarship on Kant’s mathematical thinking, Carl Posy and Ofra Rechter gather leading authors who approach it from multiple perspectives, engaging with topics includ- ing geometry, arithmetic, logic, and metaphysics. Their essays offer fine-grained analysis of Kant’s philosophy of mathematics in the context of his Critical philosophy, and also show sensitivity to its historical background. The volume will be important for readers seeking a comprehensive picture of the current scholarship about the development of Kant’s philosophy of mathematics, its place in his overall philosophy, and the Kantian themes that influenced mathematics and its philosophy after Kant. is Professor Emeritus of Philosophy at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. He is editor of Kant’s Philosophy of Math- ematics: Modern Essays () and has written extensively on the philosophy of mathematics as well as on Kant. is a member of the philosophy department at Tel Aviv University. Her work focuses on Kant within the philosophy of mathematics and its history, and she has published a number of papers on Kant’s philosophy of arithmetic.
    [Show full text]
  • A Complete Bibliography of Publications in the Rutherford Journal
    A Complete Bibliography of Publications in The Rutherford Journal Nelson H. F. Beebe University of Utah Department of Mathematics, 110 LCB 155 S 1400 E RM 233 Salt Lake City, UT 84112-0090 USA Tel: +1 801 581 5254 FAX: +1 801 581 4148 E-mail: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] (Internet) WWW URL: http://www.math.utah.edu/~beebe/ 25 July 2019 Version 1.01 Title word cross-reference 1951 [Car18]. After [Tee07]. Again [Sma18]. Agent [He06]. Alan [CP12, Cop18]. Analogue [Car07]. Anticipatory [Bod07]. Argument [Mus07]. Artificial [Rou18]. Atomic [Cha06]. Australian [BC07]. Automatic [Dor07, Swa10]. Babbage [Swa10]. Back [Sma18]. be [Sce18]. becomes [Mag06]. Behavior [Dre10]. Bletchley [Cop10, Wei06]. Bombe [Car10]. Breaking [Cop10]. Brief [Bow10, Sce18]. Business [Asp07]. C [BSS18]. Canterbury [Cla06]. Causality [He06]. Charles [Swa10]. Chemistry [Cha06, He06]. Chronology [Car07]. Civilization [Bon18]. Code [Cop10]. cognition [Ste03]. College [Cla06]. Colossus [Cop10]. Common [McC10]. Computation [Dre10, Mah10, Swa10]. Computational 1 2 [Swa10]. Computer [CP12, Sha10]. Computers [Cor10, DT18]. Computing [BC07, Car07, CPSB10, T+06]. Conference [Car18]. Contributors [Ano18b]. Creation [Bro06a]. Critical [Bro06a, Bro07]. D [Bro07]. Dalton [Cha06]. Darwinian [Bro06a]. Depend [He06]. designed [Hau06]. Dialogue [CC07]. Discovery [ADP06]. Do [Cas07, He06]. Early [Bow10]. Eggs [Wei06]. Elastician [Mag06]. Electronic [Cor10]. Else [Cas07]. Enabled [Asp10]. Events [Cas07]. Evolution [Bro06a, Ste03]. Existence [Ste18]. Experimental [Cha06]. Explanation [He06]. Export [Asp07]. Father [CP12]. Figure [Bon18]. First [Dor07]. Fish [Wei06]. Formalizing [McC10]. Formats [He06]. friendly [CK06]. Fujita [Asp07]. German [Cop10]. Grey [Bod07]. Hauser [Bro07]. Henry [Dor18]. Heritage [DT18]. History [BC07, Bow10, Cop10, CPSB10]. Hodsdon [Dor18]. Hollerith [ADP06]. Hostile [Bro06a, Ste03]. Human [Bro06a, Cor10, Ste03].
    [Show full text]
  • Department of Philosophy Faculty of Humanities Hebrew University
    Department of Philosophy Faculty of Humanities Hebrew University, Jerusalem Report of the External Evaluation Team for The Council for Higher Education November, 2009 Evaluation Committee Report, Philosophy, Hebrew University of Jerusalem Contents General Background……………………………………………………………3 Committee Procedures………………………………………………………...4 Executive Summary…………..…………………………………………………5 In-depth description of subjects examined……………………………7 Department of Philosophy……..………………………………………...…..7 Appendices : Appendix 1 – Letter of Appointment Appendix 2 - Schedule of the visit 2 Evaluation Committee Report, Philosophy, Hebrew University of Jerusalem The following document is the Evaluation Committee's report on the Department of Philosophy of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem to the Quality Assessment Unit of the Council for Higher Education (CHE). In keeping with the template provided by the CHE, the report is divided into three parts, A: General Background and Executive Summary, B: In-depth description of subjects examined, and C: Recommendations. Part A – General Background, Committee Procedure and Executive Summary General Background The report is based upon the Evaluation Committee's interviews at the Mount Scopus campus of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem and its study of the Department of Philosophy's Self-Evaluation Report of December, 2008. The Evaluation Committee (EC) is composed of Professors Paul Davies, Richard Eldridge, Jacob Joshua Ross, Gila Sher, and the committee's chair, Daniel Dahlstrom. Ms. Michal Kabatznik served as the CHE appointed coordinator. Each member of the committee received and studied the Department's Self-Evaluation Report individually in advance of the committee's meeting in Jerusalem. Shortly before its on-site visit, the members of the EC met and conferred to determine the number and ranking of questions to pose during its interviews as well as to assign different members of the committee with the responsibility of leading the respective discussions with the different groups of interviewees.
    [Show full text]
  • The Activity of the Council for Higher Education in the Area of Quality
    Department of Philosophy Self-evaluation Report December 2008 2 Contents Chapter 1: The Institution 3 Chapter 2: The Parent Unit Operating the 6 Study Programs Under Evaluation Chapter 3: The Evaluated Study Program 16 Chapter 4: Research 63 Chapter 5: The Self-Evaluation Process, 82 Summary and Conclusions 3 Chapter 1 - The Institution 1.1 A brief summary describing the institution and its development since its establishment, including details of the campus(es) where the institution's teaching activities take place (number and location), names of the faculties /schools/departments in the institution, the over-all number of students studying towards academic degrees in the institution according to faculty and degree (first degree, second degree with thesis, second degree without thesis, doctoral degree), the date of recognition by the Council for Higher Education. 1. The Institution The proposal to establish a Jewish institution for higher education was raised as far back as 1882, yet the cornerstone of the Hebrew University was only laid in Jerusalem in 1918. On April 1, 1925, the university was officially opened on Mount Scopus. The academic life of the university (courses and research) took place on Mount Scopus until 1948, the year of the establishment of the State of Israel. During the War of Independence, the road to Mount Scopus was blocked and the university was forced into exile; it continued its activities thereafter in rented facilities scattered throughout various parts of Jerusalem. In 1955, the government of Israel allocated land in the Givat Ram neighborhood for a new Hebrew University campus. The Campus opened in 1960.
    [Show full text]