2026年6月12日 星期五

紀念 Herbert A. Simon (司馬賀) ( 2026 6月15) 題目：淵博人生敘述學與人工科學，從SIMOＮ的回憶錄《我生的諸模式》 代表作《人工科學》生命學問的完成，或許可稱之為＂淵博人生敘述學與人工科學＂ ；百歲紀念稿 (2016.6.15)


漢清講堂 
時間：2026年6月15，周一 10點~11點
地址：台北市新生南路三段88號2樓
(報名 Email)：hcsimonl@gmail.com


紀念  H. A. SIMON( 2026 6月15) 題目：淵博人生敘述學與人工科學，從SIMOＮ的回憶錄《我生的諸模式》 代表作《人工科學》生命學問的完成，或許可稱之為＂淵博人生敘述學與人工科學＂。Nobel Prize laureate Demis Hassabis was awarded the Nobel Prize for using AI to predict the structure of proteins. For him, AI is a tool that will help scientists make even more discoveries in the years to come.     Hassabis took part in our Nobel Prize Dialogue ‘The Future of Science With AI’ which discussed how AI might transform science in the future.      讀＂游珮芸的一千零一頁 《從《茉莉人生》到《來自清水的孩子》》出發．．．．．．．《茉莉人生》《Ｓ，我的父親說．．．．．．》（ＧＩＰＩ/GIPI 作，倪安宇翻譯，台北:無限，2013）．．．．．  。迷宮-追尋-決策   ：「我們身後能留下的，唯有愛。」Herbert A. Simon先生紀念 (2026 0615；1  《紐約時報》，《明周文化 MP Weekly  明報周刊文化 ) 村上春樹的短篇小說〈四月某個晴朗的早晨遇見100%的女孩〉（收錄於同名短篇小說集《遇見100%的女孩》中）。：很簡單地說，人生的決策準則是「滿意」（他創英文新字），非最佳或極值…..。 我們每一人都有一套價值與哲學，Simon 選擇四十幾年每天步行來回學校，吃穿等到極簡單，多發表各領域的深入論文，課程創新      紀念5    從MIT公開下載的書： Scientific Discovery: Computational Explorations of the Creative ProcessUnavailable By Patrick W. Langley, Herbert A. Simon, Gary Bradshaw, Jan M. Zytkow  到 2026年5月18 " //今天 Google IO 活動同步發表了兩篇 Nature 論文，值得學研界朋友關注"

初次翻 Martin Greenberg英譯本2013：    Faust: A Tragedy, Parts One and Two, Fully Revised by Johann Wolfgang von Goethe (Author),   三感想： 歌德的Dedication 初的迷宮  "...I retrace life's labyrinthine..."  VS MODELS OF MY LIFE. 第2衝擊  ：  The exact phrase "In the beginning was the Deed" comes from Johann Wolfgang von Goethe's classic play, Faust. In the famous "Study" scene, the protagonist, Faust, struggles to translate the opening line of the Gospel of John ("In the beginning was the Word") into German and ultimately decides that "Deed" (Tat) is the most meaningful starting point for human existence.  封底摘錄 H. BLOOM 的書評關於 CANON 詩歌的六面？考量 (翻譯))


“In the next 10 years we are going to be entering what I feel like is a new renaissance.”

 

Nobel Prize laureate Demis Hassabis was awarded the Nobel Prize for using AI to predict the structure of proteins. For him, AI is a tool that will help scientists make even more discoveries in the years to come.

 

Hassabis took part in our Nobel Prize Dialogue ‘The Future of Science With AI’ which discussed how AI might transform science in the future.

 

Watch the full event at https://www.nobelprize.org/events/nobel-prize-dialogue/london-2026/



紀念  H. A. SIMON( 2026 6月15) 題目：淵博人生敘述學與人工科學，從SIMOＮ的回憶錄《我生的諸模式》 代表作《人工科學》生命學問的完成，或許可稱之為＂淵博人生敘述學與人工科學＂，讀＂游珮芸的一千零一頁 《從《茉莉人生》到《來自清水的孩子》》出發．．．．．．．《茉莉人生》《Ｓ，我的父親說．．．．．．》（ＧＩＰＩ/GIPI 作，倪安宇翻譯，台北:無限，2013）．．．．．  。迷宮-追尋-決策   ：「我們身後能留下的，唯有愛。」


這是篇有趣有用的文章,值得教育界重視. 即深入了解漫畫，動畫，圖像小說，

Ｓ，我的父親說．．．．．．

AI科技，整合。當然,題材，我們的故事等，同樣重要。譬如東海傑出校友周教授有「文學工廠」，有創意學院的「音樂劇」，有高唱「AI pc 教室」，只是散發出來的宣傳，成果還差得很遠.





紀念 H A SIMON 2026 (0)：

 能用它來談2026年的 AI 嗎：某 AI 大師譚 讓‧皮亞傑的一句話："Intelligence is not what you know, it's what you do when you don't know"  約翰·霍爾特在1964年出版的一本書中對其進行了重新表述並使其廣為人知：“智力的真正考驗不在於我們知道多少，而在於當我們不知道該做什麼時，我們的行      



我想起了發展心理學先驅讓‧皮亞傑一句精彩卻又似曾相識的名言：


“L'intelligence, ce n'est pas ce que l'on sait, mais ce que l'on fait quand on ne sait pas.”


“智力不是你知道什麼，而是當你不知道時你做什麼。”


顯然，這並非皮亞傑的原話，而是他對這主題觀點的總結。心理學家約翰·霍爾特在1964年出版的一本書中對其進行了重新表述並使其廣為人知：“智力的真正考驗不在於我們知道多少，而在於當我們不知道該做什麼時，我們的行為方式。”


這些簡單的引言闡明了當今人工智慧領域的許多問題：


- 為什麼累積陳述性知識看似智力，但其實並非智力？


- 為什麼累積技能看似智力，但其實並非智力？


- 為什麼無需事先訓練就能「零基礎」解決新問題的能力是衡量智力的重要指標？


- 為什麼智力並非一系列後天習得的技能，而是無需或只需極少訓練就能快速掌握新技能的能力？


我們對現實的認知模型使我們能夠預測自身行為的後果，從而具備規劃能力，最終使我們能夠在無需事先訓練的情況下理解和應對新情況。

I was reminded of this wonderful, yet apocryphal, quote by developmental psychology pioneer Jean Piaget:

"L'intelligence, ce n'est pas ce que l'on sait, mais ce que l'on fait quand on ne sait pas." 

"Intelligence is not what you know, it's what you do when you don't know"


Apparently this is not a real quote but a synthesis of Piaget's positions on the topic. Psychologist John Holt reformulated and popularized it in a 1964 book: "The true test of intelligence is not how much we know how to do, but how we behave when we don't know what to do." 


These simple quotes clarify many questions surrounding AI today: 

- Why the accumulation of declarative knowledge seems like Intelligence but is not intelligence.

- Why the accumulation of skills seems like intelligence but is not intelligence.

- Why the ability to solve new problems "zero shot" without prior training on said problem is an important metric of intelligence.

- Why intelligence is not a collection of learned skills but an ability to acquire new skills very quickly, with very little or no training.


Our mental model of reality gives us the ability to predict the consequences of our actions, which gives us the ability to plan, which gives us the ability to apprehend new situations without prior training

 



AI Overview


是的，黃仁勳在卡內基美隆大學（CMU）2026屆畢業典禮的演講中，確實提到了該校在機器人與人工智慧領域的先驅歷史。 [1]
他特別指出，CMU 是人工智慧與機器人技術的發源地之一，並提到了該校在1979年成立了著名的機器人研究所（Robotics Institute），這項成就鞏固了 CMU 在技術創新與前沿科技發展中的歷史地位。 [1]
在這場以「智慧普及化將重塑每個人」為核心的演講中，黃仁勳回顧了從1950年代的 AI 先驅學者（如 Allen Newell 和 Herbert Simon）到1979年成立機器人研究所，強調 CMU 數十年來始終處於技術革命的最前線。 [1]
您可以透過 卡內基美隆大學官方 YouTube 頻道 觀看完整的畢業典禮致詞影片，深入了解他對 AI 時代未來人才與產業發展的見解。 [1, 2, 3]


AI OVERVIEW： 黃仁勳在卡內基美隆大學（CMU）2026屆畢業典禮演講中，強調CMU是人工智慧（AI）真正的發源地之一。他指出，該校研究人員在1950年代發明了史上第一個AI電腦程式「邏輯理論家」（Logic Theorist）。「邏輯理論家」是由CMU的艾倫·紐厄爾（Allen Newell）、司馬賀（Herbert A. Simon，後獲諾貝爾獎）與約翰·克里夫·肖（J. C. Shaw）於1955年與1956年間共同開發。這個程式被廣泛認為是歷史上第一個能自動進行符號推理與解決問題的AI程式。它成功證明了數學巨著《數學原理》（Principia Mathematica）中的多個定理，甚至找出了比原著更簡練的證明方法。這段歷史象徵了AI發展的開端，也呼應了黃仁勳在演講中鼓勵畢業生，在這個由AI重塑運算的新時代中「親手創造未來」的期許。

 

Herbert A. Simon先生紀念 (2026 0615；1  《紐約時報》，《明周文化 MP Weekly  明報周刊文化 ) 村上春樹的短篇小說〈四月某個晴朗的早晨遇見100%的女孩〉（收錄於同名短篇小說集《遇見100%的女孩》中）。：很簡單地說，人生的決策準則是「滿意」（他創英文新字），非最佳或極值…..。 我們每一人都有一套價值與哲學，Simon 選擇四十幾年每天步行來回學校，吃穿等到極簡單，多發表各領域的深入論文，課程創新


AI Overview
這部作品是村上春樹的短篇小說〈四月某個晴朗的早晨遇見100%的女孩〉（收錄於同名短篇小說集《遇見100%的女孩》中）。
故事中描述男女主角在東京原宿的後街擦身而過，男主角回憶起這段往事時，寫下了這段經典的句子：「她從東邊往西邊走，我從西邊往東邊走。真是一個非常舒服的四月的早晨。」
您可以透過 博客來 了解更多關於這本經典短篇集的資訊。



------

我們前天在關於黃仁勳在CMU 畢業典禮演講，談到我的英雄/筆友 Simon,沒想到隔一天在紐約時報就有這篇。其實這篇文章還提到許多其他故事,如村上的短篇小說，譬如說，大學有兩位戀人，相信如果「真佳偶」，畢業後各自從東與西去「找」，最終一定會重逢的……
很簡單地說，人生的決策準則是「滿意」（他創英文新字），非最佳或極值…..。
我們每一人都有一套價值與哲學，Simon 選擇四十幾年每天步行來回學校，吃穿等到極簡單，多發表各領域的深入論文，課程創新，如法國革命中的決策論等等。
或許找時間將此篇剪貼在此寶地。

明周文化 MP Weekly 

孤獨的少年少女在街角偶遇，直覺認定彼此是天作之合——這簡直是奇蹟般的相遇。他們牽着手，暢談數小時。一絲疑慮突然在腦海浮現：「夢想這麼輕易就成真，真的好嗎？」於是，二人決定考驗這段關係：若真是天作之合，即使分開，也必能重逢，到時便可確信。少年向西走，少女向東走。他們確實是天作之合。多年後，兩人在街頭擦肩而過，但記憶已經模糊。最終，二人沒有重逢。
做決策時，如果你總是追求「最好」，恐怕很難感到幸福。
身處資訊泛濫、選擇繁多的時代，我們以為只要拚命尋找，就一定能找到萬中無一的選項。現代香港人會稱之為「選擇困難症」或「完美主義」，心理學家則稱之為「最優主義」（tendency maximizing）。
大多數人都忽略了，「搜尋」本身也是一種成本，如果你把這點納入考慮，就會發現：最好的策略，恰恰不在於追求最好。
人工智能與認知心理學先驅、諾貝爾經濟學獎得主 Herbert Simon 做決策時，會考慮若干選項，偶爾請教他人，選定之後便向前走。他不苦惱，也不後悔。（The best is enemy of the good）是他的座右銘。
他的女兒憶述：父親為免每天挑選顏色款式，只穿同一品牌的襪子；同時只擁有一頂黑色貝雷帽。
以上為文章節錄，完整文章於《明周文化》網站：https://mpweekly.hk/kB3LY
顯示較少




The Nobel-Winning Psychologist Who Believed He Found the Secret to Happiness
May 12, 2026
A peach balancing on top of another peach, against a dark background.
Credit...Daniel Ribar
Listen · 7:03 min
Share full article528
By David Epstein
Mr. Epstein is the author of “Inside the Box: How Constraints Make Us Better.”
If in making decisions you are often guided by a search for the best, you are going about decision making all wrong — and you’re also probably less happy for it.
In an age of information and choice abundance, we assume we can find the best of everything if we look long and hard enough. Psychologists call that tendency maximizing.
But searching for the best is the wrong goal. That is because searching is itself a cost, and most people forget to account for it. If you did, you would see that the optimal strategy isn’t optimizing at all.
There’s a better way to make decisions. To understand it, you should know about Herbert Simon, a pioneer of artificial intelligence and cognitive psychology, as well as a Nobel laureate in economics. Mr. Simon demonstrated that for most decisions, humans can’t really evaluate the options available — there are too many, our information about them is incomplete and our minds aren’t built to weigh them all — and so we rely on mental shortcuts. He coined the term “satisficing” — a portmanteau of satisfy and suffice — to describe how we consider a limited set of options, then choose one that is good enough and move on to live our lives.
Sign up for the Opinion Today newsletter Get expert analysis of the news and a guide to the big ideas shaping the world every weekday morning. Get it sent to your inbox.
When Mr. Simon faced a decision, he considered a few alternatives, sometimes asked for advice, chose and moved on. He didn’t agonize, and he didn’t second-guess. “The best is enemy of the good” was the mantra he lived by.
Mr. Simon was, as he put it, an “incorrigible satisficer.” His eldest daughter, Katherine, recalled that he wore one brand of socks to avoid selecting color or style each morning, and he owned exactly one black beret at a time, made at a particular haberdashery in Europe.
According to Katherine, he said that one needed only three sets of clothes: “one on one’s body, one in the wash and one in the closet ready to wear.” He always ate the same breakfast — oatmeal, half a grapefruit, black coffee — and lived in the same house for 46 years.
“My father simplified his life in terms of his daily habits,” Katherine wrote, “thus eliminating the need to make little decisions about everything.” By taking the small decisions off his plate, that simplification freed his attention for the people and work that actually mattered to him. The mathematician John Allen Paulos illustrated the same principle with a thought experiment in his 1988 book “Innumeracy”: How should you choose your final romantic partner? First, he argued, you should estimate the number of people you might plausibly date in your lifetime. Then date roughly the first third with no intention of committing. Use that time purely to calibrate what you liked, what you didn’t like and what you might be missing.
After that, commit to the very next person you like better than everyone you’ve already dated. Mr. Paulos was illustrating a well-known result in probability, which shows that this rule gives you the best chance of ending up with the best partner in the whole sequence. Keep pushing past that point, and you’re more likely to end up with a worse match or no one at all. The core insight — that the path to the best outcome runs directly through the willingness to stop searching long before you’ve exhausted the options — extends far beyond dating.
Psychologists who followed up on Mr. Simon’s work have shown that his personal philosophy was both efficient and wise. Shortly after Mr. Simon’s death in 2001, a team of researchers created a maximization scale to measure where a person falls on the spectrum between maximizer and satisficer. They found that it’s usually bad to be a maximizer.
Maximizers tend to be less satisfied with their decisions and their lives. They are typically less happy, more prone to regret and more likely to compare themselves endlessly with others. Satisficers don’t necessarily have low standards. Their standard is “good enough for me” rather than “the best out there,” and that makes it possible to feel satisfied with their choices, instead of haunted by the ones they didn’t make.
The psychologist Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, who first used the term “flow” to describe states of complete absorption in an activity, put it well. By making up one’s mind to invest in a choice, regardless of more attractive options that may come along later, “a great deal of energy gets freed up for living, instead of being spent on wondering about how to live.”
Advertisement This is critical today because chronic maximizing has never been easier. In 2006 an economist calculated that the consumer options available to citizens of modern economies exceeded those of preindustrial societies roughly by a factor of 100 million. That is an almost incomprehensible multiplication of choice, and it extends well beyond consumer goods into questions of who to be, how to live, where to work and whom to love.
Social media has intensified the problem by functioning as an infinite comparison engine. When you can see a curated highlight reel of everyone else’s career, relationship, home and vacation, the very concept of “good enough” begins to feel like settling.
The pull to keep searching for something better has poisoned even the most mundane moments. Research shows that giving viewers many videos to flip between makes them more bored than if they focus on just one. One way to interpret the findings is that the mere notion that something better might be out there spoils the moment.
Studies in the United States and China show that since about 2010, young people have reported becoming increasingly bored. Dating apps have offered a version of Mr. Paulos’s thought experiment, with users forever wondering what might be beyond that next swipe — maximizing in its purest form.
And now artificial intelligence promises to help us optimize everything: our schedules, our diets, our wardrobes, our creative output. If Mr. Simon was right, the hidden danger of these tools is that they will expand the menu of options and comparisons even further. The Japanese novelist Haruki Murakami captured the maximizer’s tragedy in a short story. A lonely boy and girl meet on a street corner and intuitively recognize that they are the perfect match for each other. It’s a miracle. They hold hands and talk for hours. But then a sliver of doubt creeps in: “Was it really all right for one’s dreams to come true so easily?” They decide on a test. If they truly are perfect for each other, they can part and will inevitably meet again. Then they’ll know for sure. The boy walks off to the west, and the girl to the east. They really were perfect for each other. Years later, they pass in the street, but their memories have faded. They never meet again.
Mr. Simon would not have been surprised they never met again. Whether you’re searching for a dishwasher or a date, set a good-enough standard. Stop when it’s met. Save your cognitive resources for things that matter.
David Epstein is the author of, most recently, “Inside the Box: How Constraints Make Us Better” and “Range: Why Generalists Triumph in a Specialized World.”
The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: letters@nytimes.com.
Follow the New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, Bluesky, WhatsApp and Threads.



++++++

 

Herbert A. Simon先生紀念5    從MIT公開下載的書： Scientific Discovery: Computational Explorations of the Creative ProcessUnavailable By Patrick W. Langley, Herbert A. Simon, Gary Bradshaw, Jan M. Zytkow  到 2026年5月18 " //今天 Google IO 活動同步發表了兩篇 Nature 論文，值得學研界朋友關注"

Book cover for Scientific Discovery: Computational Explorations of the Creative Process

Scientific Discovery: Computational Explorations of the Creative ProcessUnavailable

By
 
Patrick W. Langley
 
Herbert A. Simon
 
Gary Bradshaw
 
Jan M. Zytkow
The MIT Press
DOI:
 
https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/6090.001.0001
ISBN electronic:
 
9780262316002
In Special Collection: CogNet
Publication date:
 
1987

Scientific discovery is often regarded as romantic and creative—and hence unanalyzable—whereas the everyday process of verifying discoveries is sober and more suited to analysis. Yet this fascinating exploration of how scientific work proceeds argues that however sudden the moment of discovery may seem, the discovery process can be described and modeled.

Using the methods and concepts of contemporary information-processing psychology (or cognitive science) the authors develop a series of artificial-intelligence programs that can simulate the human thought processes used to discover scientific laws. The programs—BACON, DALTON, GLAUBER, and STAHL—are all largely data-driven, that is, when presented with series of chemical or physical measurements they search for uniformities and linking elements, generating and checking hypotheses and creating new concepts as they go along.

Scientific Discovery examines the nature of scientific research and reviews the arguments for and against a normative theory of discovery; describes the evolution of the BACON programs, which discover quantitative empirical laws and invent new concepts; presents programs that discover laws in qualitative and quantitative data; and ties the results together, suggesting how a combined and extended program might find research problems, invent new instruments, and invent appropriate problem representations. Numerous prominent historical examples of discoveries from physics and chemistry are used as tests for the programs and anchor the discussion concretely in the history of science.


Table of Contents




//今天 Google IO 活動同步發表了兩篇 Nature 論文，值得學研界朋友關注：


- Gottweis, J., Weng, WH., Daryin, A. et al. Accelerating scientific discovery with Co-Scientist. Nature (2026). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-026-10644-y


這篇發表於《自然》的論文介紹了 Google 團隊開發的 Co-Scientist。這是一個基於 Gemini 的多代理 AI 系統，由生成、反思、排名、演化、鄰近和元審查六個專業代理組成。不同於傳統工具，它能在非同步框架內透過錦標賽制的演化過程與自我對弈辯論，生成前所未有、可證實的新穎科學假說，且其假說品質隨測試時計算量的增加而持續提升，未見飽和。


Co-Scientist 在生物醫學領域展現出強大實力：在白血病藥物重定向測試中，系統建議的藥物有三種經體外實驗證實能抑制細胞存活；它甚至獨立提出 cf-PICI 擴展宿主範圍的假說，與研究組尚未發表的實驗發現完全吻合。在 15 個研究目標的專家評估中，Co-Scientist 的假說水準成功超越了 Gemini 2.0 Pro、GPT-4o、OpenAI o1/o3-mini 及 DeepSeek R1 等前沿模型。


- Aygün, E., Belyaeva, A., Comanici, G. et al. An AI system to help scientists write expert-level empirical software. Nature (2026). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-026-10658-6


這篇發表於《自然》的論文介紹了 Google 團隊開發的 ERA（實證研究助理）。這是一個將大型語言模型與樹狀搜索結合的代理 AI 系統，能自主生成、測試並迭代改進科學軟體，有效解決了過去需要專家花費數年勞動才能創建特定領域軟體的瓶頸。


ERA 的核心機制是透過大型語言模型改寫代碼以提升可量化指標，並利用樹狀搜索引導探索與回溯。該系統在六個科學基準測試中達到專家級水準：在單細胞 RNA 測序分析中，其生成的方法超越了公開排行榜上的既有做法；在 COVID-19 預測上，也擊敗了美國 CDC 的集成模型。研究更發現，ERA 有能力透過重組現有演算法來開創全新策略。這項突破展示了 AI 在多個高風險領域同時創建科學軟體的能力，也引發了未來如何部署與治理這類系統的深遠討論。//







----

2016年年初，我將blog http://hchas.blogspot.tw/ (hc是我；has 是 Herbert A. Simon生前電郵的簡稱。) 改稱為

Herbert A. Simon 司馬賀百歲紀念  
由blog的資料，它應該是2008年6月15日左右設置的。這幾年，上傳376篇。

我認為，最有意義的是我今年將2001年6月15日的紀念專刊上傳。








2016.6.9

Wikipedia 很有意思，我都不知道Herbert A. Simon (司馬賀) 的英文專頁稍微不同了。

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herbert_A._Simon

讀起來有點意思，有些錯誤可在此更正。



Herbert A. Simon
Herbert simon red complete.jpg
BornHerbert Alexander Simon
June 15, 1916
Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA
DiedFebruary 9, 2001 (aged 84)
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania,USA
NationalityUnited States
FieldsArtificial Intelligence
Cognitive psychology
Computer science
Economics
Political science
InstitutionsCarnegie Mellon University
University of California, Berkeley
Illinois Institute of Technology
Alma materUniversity of Chicago
Doctoral advisorHenry Schultz
Other academic advisorsRudolf Carnap
Nicholas Rashevsky
Harold Lasswell
Charles Merriam[1]
John R. Commons[2]
Doctoral studentsEdward Feigenbaum
Allen Newell
Richard Waldinger[3]
John Muth
William F. Pounds
Known forLogic Theory Machine
General Problem Solver
Bounded rationality
Satisficing
InfluencesRichard T. Ely, John R. Commons, Henry George,Chester Barnard, Charles Merriam
InfluencedDaniel Kahneman, Amos Tversky, James March, Allen Newell, Philip E. Tetlock,Richard Thaler, John Muth,Oliver E. Williamson,Massimo Egidi, Vela Velupillai, Ha Joon Chang
Notable awardsTuring Award (1975)
Nobel Prize in Economics(1978)
National Medal of Science(1986)
Harold Pender Award (1987)
von Neumann Theory Prize(1988)
APA Award for Distinguished Scientific Contributions to Psychology (1969)
APA Award for Lifetime Contributions to Psychology (1993)
ACM Fellow (1994)
IJCAI Award for Research Excellence (1995)
SpouseDorothea Isabel Pye[4](1939-2001, his death) (1913-2002)
ChildrenKatherine, Peter, Barbara



, Of boyhood Simon of the motto is that it is the phrase "fighting flee who is living able to fight again."

 少年時代のサイモンの座右の銘は「戦って逃げる者は生きて再び戦える」というフレーズだという。

Books[edit]

– 4th ed. in 1997, The Free Press
  • 1957. Models of Man. John Wiley. Presents mathematical models of human behaviour.
  • 1958 (with James G. March and the collaboration of Harold Guetzkow). Organizations. New York: Wiley. the foundation of modern organization theory
  • 1969. The Sciences of the Artificial. MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass, 1st edition. Made the idea easy to grasp: "objects (real or symbolic) in the environment of the decision-maker influence choice as much as the intrinsic information-processing capabilities of the decision-maker"; Explained "the principles of modeling complex systems, particularly the human information-processing system that we call the mind"
- 3rd ed. in 1996, MIT Press.
  • 1972 (with Allen Newell). Human Problem Solving. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, (1972). "the most important book on the scientific study of human thinking in the 20th century"
  • 1977. Models of Discovery : and other topics in the methods of science. Dordrecht, Holland: Reidel.
  • 1979. Models of Thought, Vols. 1 and 2. Yale University Press. His papers on human information-processing and problem-solving.
  • 1982. Models of Bounded Rationality, Vols. 1 and 2. MIT Press. His papers on economics.
- Vol. 3. in 1997, MIT Press. His papers on economics since the publication of Vols. 1 and 2 in 1982. The papers grouped under the category "The Structure of Complex Systems"– dealing with issues such as causal ordering, decomposability, aggregation of variables, model abstraction– are of general interest in systems modelling, not just in economics.
  • 1983. Reason in Human Affairs, Stanford University Press. A readable 115pp. book on human decision-making and information processing, based on lectures he gave at Stanford in 1982. A popular presentation of his technical work.
  • 1987 (with P. Langley, G. Bradshaw, and J. Zytkow). Scientific Discovery: computational explorations of the creative processes. MIT Press.
  • 1991. Models of My Life. Basic Books, Sloan Foundation Series. His autobiography.
  • 1997. An Empirically Based Microeconomics. Cambridge University Press. A compact and readable summary of his criticisms of conventional "axiomatic" microeconomics, based on a lecture series.
  • 2008 (posthumously). Economics, Bounded Rationality and the Cognitive Revolution. Edward Elgar Publishing, ISBN 1847208967. reprint some of his papers not widely read by economists.

単著[編集]

  • 『経営行動』（ダイヤモンド社, 1965年／新版, 1989年）
  • 『システムの科学』（ダイヤモンド社, 1969年／新訳版, 1977年／新版, パーソナルメディ
  • ア, 1987年／第3版, 1999年）
  • システムの科学
    パーソナルメディア 1969
    ISBN:489362167X
    Herbert A. Simon
    The Science of The Artificial 1969･ 1981

  • 『人間行動のモデル』（同文舘出版, 1970年）
  • 『意思決定の科学』（産業能率大学出版部, 1979年）
  • 『人間の理性と行動』（文真堂, 1984年）
  • 『意思決定と合理性』（文真堂, 1987年）
  • 『学者人生のモデル』（岩波書店, 1998年）ISBN 4000028243

共著[編集]

  • （O・ティード）『コンピューターと経営』（日本生産性本部, 1964年）
  • （J・G・マーチ）『オーガニゼーションズ』（ダイヤモンド社, 1977年）
  • （D・W・スミスバーグ、V・A・トンプソン）『組織と管理の基礎理論』（ダイヤモンド社, 1977年）
  • （クラレンス・E・リドレー）『行政評価の基準――自治体活動の測定』（北樹出版, 1999年）

補足[編集]




下周三6月15，紀念H. A. Simon 百年，或許應該用此則當開場白。可以談的很多，譬如說我跟Simon談 B. F. Skinner 多卷本回憶錄中說，他沒有創行為主義學派 (School)的雄心，所以都部介紹學生到大學任教。..... 也可談談 CMU大學從2013年整合出的The Simon Initiative， 該大學網業有專門談這的。



Models of My Life

目錄 
楔子 i 
引言 vi 


I 二十一歲生日前的旅程

第一章  威斯康辛的男孩 1 
第二章  森林與田野 30 
第三章  芝加哥的教育 46 
第四章  一次科學革命的經歷 ─芝加哥的政治學 71 

II  科學家的年輕世代

第五章  嘗試研究：城市管理者學會 88 
第六章管理研究：伯克萊 100 
第七章 在伊利諾伊理工學院教書 119 
第八章 攸關忠誠 151 
第九章 建立商學院：工商管理研究院 174
 第十章 研究與科學政治學 235 
第十一章 與喬治‧路易斯‧博爾赫斯的談話 251 
第十二章 人工智能的根基 268 
第十三章 攀登：獲得人工智能 280 

III 從山上的視見

第十四章  探索平原 303 
第十五章 經軸上的私人線索 327 
第十六章 為認知科學和人工智能創造一個大學環境 344
 第十七章 談愛好爭論 372 
第十八章 學生動亂 386 
第十九章 作為政治家的科學家 402 
第二十章 國外獵奇 423 

 IV  六十歲之後的研究

第二十一章  獲諾貝爾獎至今 439 
第二十二章業餘外交家 461 
第二十三章 選擇的指南 491 
跋　作為問題解決者的科學家 500 


參考書目 502 
主題索引 523



2015.6.9

談些數學教學故事 (斜面 vs 斜率 )


幾年前，耳聞臺大外文系打算放鬆學生入學成績中，對數學的"標準"之設定或要求。

也許同一時候，我聽中研院統計所的創所所長趙民德老師說，近十來年，台灣留學生日減，
反過來，中國的留學生日多，表現不俗，頗有勢力。他甚至憂心說，將來可能無法從美歐學校
，找到合格的台灣學者回國當統計所的所長。

近日，許多中研院的院士聯合呼籲，十二年國教要大刪高中數學學習的時數之作法，
很不足取，很快對我國國力和人才素質造成大傷害。


這方面，像我這種人微言輕的人，原不敢發表意見，或多說話。不過，我今天讀到一本翻譯書
，其中記著名的心理學家B. F. Skinner自敘如何作時間管理，很有意思。

.......我一坐下，就打開特別的桌燈，它會啟動時鐘，計算我坐在桌前的時間，累計到12小時，
我就會在累計的曲線上畫個點，其斜面就顯示了我整體的生產力。.......


我沒原文，不過上文的"斜面" ，很可能是slope，專門術語稱為"斜率"。這一翻譯，
也不算離譜。我相信譯者也知道斜率這詞，只是她可能沒讀過用英文寫的數學書而已。

我似乎有點小題大做。或許我不甘寂寞，也想湊熱鬧談點數學而已。數學教學，
老師可能很重要，可惜好的數學老師可能可遇不可求。



我十幾年前有位筆友叫 Herbert Simon，他雖是政治學的博士，不過勤自修高等數學，
是個世界級的科學家。他相信數學或任何科目，都應該也都可以自修成功。
中國還願意為他的學說編一套高中數學課本，在這系統，老師只是輔導員而已，
教材才是真老師。他說，很幸運，全世界的教育體制都很保守，所以他的經驗和假說，根本只能冰藏，只有中國例，可做教育實驗。

----6.10
袁中道 (小修) 【陳無異寄生篇序】

 古人有言：“能推食與人者，嘗飢者也；賜之車馬而辭焉者，

不畏徒步者也。”若畏飢而憚步，則天下事其吝為之，怯為之，不亦多乎？

無異常天下之難者也，必無難天下事矣，予以此券無異焉。


--6.13

重視心理分析在"民國時期"的"發展"：
回京雜感四則
林語堂這篇一則寫於1925.10.10 ，將inferiority complex 翻譯成"遜色癥結"；"我們大多數的信仰發源於感情態度 (feeling-attitudes) ，不是根據理智的。" 參考了Rationalization in every-day life. By Jones, Ernest
The Journal of Abnormal Psychology, Vol 3(3), Aug-Sep 1908, 161-169.
另一則則翻譯了一段取自Psychology and politics : and other essays
by Rivers, W. H. R. (William Halse Rivers), 1864-1922
Published 1923 https://archive.org/details/psychologypoliti00rive
的話："我想大半的受教育的人現在承認許多種的裝大的社會的行為，實隱含著一種懷疑，及忸怩不敢自信的態度而已。心理學家謂此類的行動是由於自衛機制 (defense-mechanism)的作用，在這作用上，人們多少在不覺中(非故意的)採取那誇大的態度，作為衛護，以避免承認其不及人時，心靈上所感覺的不安。"
 inferiority complex 1922新詞。有意思的是，Herbert Simon 的博士論文3處引用 S. Freud的著作。

我們在工商管理研究院所爭論的，是大事，是原則、重大爭端和政策，而不是個人的或組織的利害。我看到弗洛伊德(Freud)先生在微笑，但是正如他可以從他自己的種種爭論中得知的那樣，他錯了。[1]【S. Frerd (1859-1939)著名心理學家，主要著作《釋夢：夢的分析與解釋》，其生涯中有不少重要弟子和朋友因理念不合而分離。】只有深信而且幾乎是盲目相信「夢想、理想」的人—像工商管理研究院中多數人那樣—才能如此艱苦鬥爭，而內心沒有懷疑、衝突，也才能經常特定問題上意見不同，而卻仍保有對共同目的和相互尊敬的深刻感受。



Since we're talking about awards...





我與Herb Simon



父母
妻、子

師
友

不畏徒步者
湯恩比
Herbert A. Simon


失敗經驗？

書房

休假思考

大自然

旅遊 vs 公共圖書館

共產思想/國家：蘇聯與中國 (包括六四)

語言學習、中文、西班牙

教育哲學與科學
Piaget

研究派系 school

電影、國際期、鋼琴






那些615計畫失敗？
公共行政 教科書比較？
威士康星 vs 沙郡
FBI 再造的組織效率與文化認同
經濟史科學





張貼者： 於 沒有留言:
訂閱： 文章 (Atom)