Warfield wrote and rewrote his Universal Priors paper. By the time he took it to the A. I. S. meeting it was completely different from his January 1988 Draft #1 of the same title. The second "Universal Priors" was specifically geared to the interests and viewpoints of academics in those disciplines known as "the humanities." In his October "Universal Priors" paper, Warfield states his belief that "Only one group of people can easily meet the challenge (of revitalizing science). It is the faculty of the liberal arts colleges...they collectively maintain and sustain the knowledge of the human being, of the language, of reasoning through representation, and of appropriate archival representations." Following this statement, Warfield insists that "systematic and detailed planning is not inconsistent with open and liberal thinking." Then he finishes the paper with a claim that the way to do such planning is with a "study of generic design, founded in Universal Priors." I remember this paper very, very well. Warfield's work was still largely ignored at GMU, and in the engineering community, in spite of the individual interest and enthusiasm of a few colleagues. Warfield had high hopes that he might enlist support, or at least understanding, from the Association for Integrative Studies, whose membership was primarily from the humanities and liberal arts disciplines. He went to Arlington, Texas with a huge stack of copies of the paper, to be distributed at the conference to anyone wanting a take-home copy, since the actual talk was supposed to be limited to only 20 minutes. He placed his extra copies at the entry door of the auditorium, on a special table where authors could leave their audience handouts. Warfield had a transparency of the Domain of Science model with him, and possibly other transparencies, I don't recall. What I do recall is that the speaker scheduled just ahead of Warfield was a very long-winded man, he overstayed his allotted time. The session chairman failed to stop him after 20-minutes. This was cutting Warfield's speaking time to only about 10 minutes, but the chairman was either too dense or too inept to do anything about it. Finally Warfield's turn came and he got up before a room full of at least 50, or maybe more people, to talk about his Universal Priors. Warfield put up the first transparency and began his talk but he was interrupted almost immediately by a comment from someone in the audience. This too, the session chairman should have stopped, since comments and questions were scheduled to come only at the end of each talk. But the audience commentator was a loudmouth who wanted to make a speech of his own. As I recall, he was loudly interpreting his ideas of the thinking of some now-dead philosopher mentioned in the talk of the preceding speaker. Then someone else in the audience jumped up to disagree. Before you knew it, these two men in the audience were arguing loudly in the packed auditorium, over an issue which had no relevance at all to Warfield's lecture. They were arguing, over something that had been discussed at an earlier talk, or perhaps over some ideas of their own, or perhaps over a combination of the same. They just kept yelling at each other, and also several others in the audience spoke up to join the scholarly discussion. The session chairman made a few feeble attempts to quiet them and get back on schedule but to no avail. The time came when Warfield was scheduled to have finished his talk. The men in the audience were still going on and on, in their scholarly debate. So Warfield just gathered up his transparencies and quietly left the room. Warfield and I went back to our motel room at the conference, and sat in gloom. Supposedly the talks were still continuing in the auditorium, since there were dozens of papers to be given that day, but Warfield said he didn't want to go hear any of them. At lunchtime, I suggested we go back to the conference and pick up those handout copies of his Universal Priors paper so we could save them. Warfield said "No, just forget about them, who cares?" But I went back anyway, and found to my disgust that there was not one single "Universal Priors" remaining on the handout table. Those dear scholars had collected and gone off with every single copy. Warfield said he was just going to forget about the whole incident. In fairness to the A.I.S. I must add that later that day not just one but several of the conference officials came up to Warfield while we were at the dinner meeting, and apologized for the whole affair, especially for the ineptness of the session chairman who had allowed it to happen. Warfield just passed it off lightly when talking to them, with some remark about how that kind of thing can happen often in a meeting with such short time slots for the speaker, etc. So I don't know if anyone in A.I.S. learned anything at all about Universal Priors on that day, or any other day. Perhaps some of the A.I.S. members took a handout copy home and read it before cramming it into their own office files and forgetting about it. Universal Priors was never published. Pieces of it showed up in some of Warfield's books, however. R.w. circa - when? I don't remember when I wrote this, probably after 2000. I won’t soon forget that presentation!