Shifting Identities in Computing: From a Useful Tool to a New Method and Theory of Science

Open Access
Conference paper


Following a number of technological and theoretical breakthroughs in the 1930s, researchers in the nascent field of automatic computing started to develop a disciplinary identity independent from computing’s progenitor fields, mainly electrical engineering and mathematical logic. As the technology matured in the next four decades, computing emerged as a field of great value to all of science and engineering. Computing’s identity as an academic discipline was the subject of many spirited debates about areas of study, methods, curricula, and relations with other fields. Debates over the name of the field and its relations with older academic departments occupied many hours and journal pages. Yet, over time computing revolutionized practices, then principles, of science and engineering. Almost every field—not just science and engineering, but also humanities—embraced computing and developed its own computational branch. Computing triumphed over all the doubts and became the most important player in science today.


Computer Science Software Engineering Computer Science Department Computational Thinking Natural Computing 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Akera A (2007) Calculating a natural world: scientists, engineers, and computers during the rise of U.S. cold war research. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  2. Aspray W (2000) Was early entry a competitive advantage? US universities that entered computing in the 1940s. IEEE Ann Hist Comput 22(3):42–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Baltimore D (2002) How biology became an information science. In: Denning PJ (ed) The invisible future. McGraw-Hill, New York, pp 43–55Google Scholar
  4. Brooks FP Jr (1987) No silver bullet: essence and accidents of software engineering. IEEE Comput 20(4):10–19MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Chaitin G (2006) Epistemology as information theory: from Leibniz to Ω. In: Stuart SAJ, Dodig-Crnkovic G (eds) Computation, information, cognition: the nexus and the liminal. Cambridge Scholars, Newcastle, pp 2–17Google Scholar
  6. Chazelle B (2006) Could your iPod be holding the greatest mystery in modern science? Math Horiz 13(4):14–15Google Scholar
  7. Denning PJ (1981) Eating our seed corn. Commun ACM 24(6):341–343CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Denning PJ, Freeman PA (2009) Computing’s paradigm. Commun ACM 52(12):28–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Denning PJ, Martell CH (2015) Great principles of computing. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  10. Denning PJ, Feigenbaum E, Gilmore P, Hearn A, Ritchie RW, Traub J (1981) A discipline in crisis. Commun ACM 24(6):370–374CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Denning PJ, Comer DE, Gries D, Mulder MC, Tucker A, Turner AJ, Young PR (1989) Computing as a discipline. Commun ACM 32(1):9–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Dijkstra EW (1972) The humble programmer. Commun ACM 15(10):859–866CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Dodig-Crnkovic G, Müller VC (2011) A dialogue concerning two world systems: info-computational vs. mechanistic. In: Dodig-Crnkovic G, Burgin M (eds) Information and computation: essays on scientific and philosophical understanding of foundations of information and computation, world scientific series in information studies, vol 2. World Scientific, SingaporeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Easton TA (2006) Beyond the algorithmization of the sciences. Commun ACM 49(5):31–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Ensmenger NL (2010) The computer boys take over: computers, programmers, and the politics of technical expertise. MIT Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Feldman JA, Sutherland WR (1979) Rejuvenating experimental computer science: a report to the National Science Foundation and others. Commun ACM 22(9):497–502CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Forsythe GE (1968) What to do till the computer scientist comes. Am Math Mon 75:454–461MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. Hamming RW (1980) The unreasonable effectiveness of mathematics. Am Math Mon 87(2):81–90MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hillis WD (1998) The pattern on the stone: the simple ideas that make computers work. Basic Books, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  20. Hoare CAR (1969) An axiomatic basis for computer programming. Commun ACM 12(10):576–580CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  21. Horgan J (1993) The death of proof. Sci Am 269(1993):74–82MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  22. Kari L, Rozenberg G (2008) The many facets of natural computing. Commun ACM 51(10):72–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Katz DL (1960) Conference report on the use of computers in engineering classroom instruction. Commun ACM 3(10):522–527Google Scholar
  24. Knuth DE (1985) Algorithmic thinking and mathematical thinking. Am Math Mon 92:170–181MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  25. Martin CD (1993) The myth of the awesome thinking machine. Commun ACM 36(4):120–133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. McCarthy J (1962) Towards a mathematical science of computation. In: Proceedings of IFIP congress 62: information processing, Munich, pp 21–28Google Scholar
  27. McCracken DD, Denning PJ, Brandin DH (1979) An ACM executive committee position on the crisis in experimental computer science. Commun ACM 22(9):503–504CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Mitchell M (2011) Ubiquity symposium: biological computation. Ubiquity, 2011 February, pp 1–7Google Scholar
  29. Naur P, Randell B (eds) (1969) Software engineering: report on a conference sponsored by the NATO Science Committee. NATO Scientific Affairs Division, BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  30. Newell A, Perlis AJ, Simon HA (1967) Computer science. Science 157(3795):1373–1374CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Papert S (1996) An exploration in the space of mathematics educations. Int J Comput Math Learn 1(1):95–123Google Scholar
  32. Parnas DL (1998) Software engineering programmes are not computer science programmes. Ann Softw Eng 6(1998):19–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Rosenbloom PS (2004) A new framework for computer science and engineering. Computer 37(11):23–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Simon HA (1969) The sciences of the artificial, 1st edn. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  35. Statz J, Miller L (1975) Certification of secondary school computer science teachers: some issues and viewpoints. In: Proceedings of the 1975 annual conference. ACM, New York, ACM ’75, pp 71–73Google Scholar
  36. Tedre M (2014) The science of computing: shaping a discipline. CRC Press/Taylor & Francis, New YorkCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  37. Tedre M, Moisseinen N (2014) Experiments in computing: a survey. Sci World J 2014(#549398):1–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Tichy WF, Lukowicz P, Prechelt L, Heinz EA (1995) Experimental evaluation in computer science: a quantitative study. J Syst Softw 28(1):9–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Wilson KG (1984) Planning for the future of U.S. scientific and engineering computing. Commun ACM 27(4):279–280CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Wing JM (2006) Computational thinking. Commun ACM 49(3):33–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Winsberg EB (2010) Science in the age of computer simulation. The University of Chicago Press, ChicagoCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Wolfram S (2002) A new kind of science. Wolfram Media, ChampaignzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  43. Zuse K (1970) Calculating space. Technical translation AZT-70-164-GEMIT. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, CambridgeGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2017

Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (, which permits any noncommercial use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license and indicate if changes were made.

The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the chapter’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Computer and Systems Sciences (DSV)Stockholm UniversityKistaSweden
  2. 2.School of ComputingUniversity of Eastern FinlandJoensuuFinland
  3. 3.Department of Computer Science, Code CS, Cebrowski InstituteNaval Postgraduate SchoolMontereyUSA

Personalised recommendations