Yes, when the field of AI first sprang up it was focused on logical deduction. In retrospect it may seem doomed to failure, but this is partially because our no

Yes, when the field of AI first sprang up it was focused on logical deduction. In retrospect it may seem doomed to failure, but this is partially because our notion of "what artificial intelligence means" changes over time. There's a joke about this - "Artificial intelligence is just whatever computers can't do yet." Before chess-playing computers, a lot of people thought that chess required a lot of real intelligence, and if you could play chess well, that was a sign of intelligence. It's not unreasonable - for humans playing chess well is a pretty good sign of intelligence. But then we got chess playing computers that obviously weren't "intelligent like people are". So nowadays it seems obvious to us that playing chess isn't a real sign of intelligence. So it's not that the logic-driven approach to AI failed. It succeeded at a lot of things that previously humans could do, but computers couldn't. Like playing chess. It just didn't get all the way to the Turing test.