In his blog post Computational Theology (4 September 2014), Samuel Arbesman notes that Oppenheimer and Zalta have used computational methods to discover a very simple argument in philosophy, whereas computational methods are more frequently used to discover complex arguments.
This is a poem I wrote when I was, maybe, eleven or twelve, when I first heard of the second law of thermodynamics:
. s a r d r a n w l e k c t a b m y l l e v a r o ; b l e g n i h c r u a m I u , e t f i h s f u l b e y l t n o
I was reminded of it by reading this from Norbert Wiener:
We are swimming upstream against a great torrent of disorganization, which tends to reduce everything to the heat death of equilibrium and sameness. … This heat death in physics has a counterpart in the ethics of Kierkegaard, who pointed out that we live in a chaotic moral universe. In this, our main obligation is to establish arbitrary enclaves of order and system. … Like the Red Queen, we cannot stay where we are without running as fast as we can (Norbert Wiener, I Am a Mathematician: The Later Life of a Prodigy (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1964), 324; quoted by James Gleick in The Information: A History, a Theory, a Flood (New York: Pantheon Books, 2011), 237).