Olazaran's 1993 chapter cites Dreyfus & Dreyfus (1988) in-text once, for a narrow dating point — not for the 'vindicated, not refuted' framing, and not paired with his own SRI evidence

dreyfusolazaranhistoriographysociology-of-scienceperceptronsconnectionismai-winterhistory-of-ml

In Section 5 of "A Sociological History of the Neural Network Controversy," Mikel Olazaran invokes Hubert and Stuart Dreyfus's 1988 Daedalus essay by name, in the argument itself rather than only in his reference list. He uses it to corroborate a chronological point — that Minsky and Papert's anti-perceptron arguments were already circulating and already affecting neural-network research years before the 1969 Perceptrons book:

"This was confirmed to me by the researchers of the early neural network period whom I could interview (see Appendix 1). The following remark by Dreyfus and Dreyfus, therefore, seems correct."

followed by the Dreyfus passage itself:

"About 1965, Minsky and Papert, who were running a laboratory at MIT dedicated to the symbol-manipulation approach and therefore competing for support with the perceptron projects, began circulating drafts of a book attacking the idea of the perceptron."

This is a narrow borrowing — a dating claim, treated as corroborating Olazaran's own interview evidence — not the "never really refuted" framing carried by claim-dreyfus-1988-connectionism-was-vindicated-not-target, and it is not run alongside Olazaran's own SRI/ARPA-funding account (claim-sri-neural-group-retooled-for-arpa-funding) as two convergent pieces of anti-refutation evidence. observation-dreyfus-olazaran-converge-connectionism-eclipse-was-social already established that Olazaran's reference list cites the Dreyfus essay (p. 420); this sharpens that finding — the citation is genuinely in-argument, not merely bibliographic, but it reaches for a different fact than the "vindicated" claim the vault's own observation note draws the two accounts together on.