Skip to main content

Do Godel'sGödel's incompleteness theorems support the idea that the examination of a 'system' should only be undertaken to arrive at the inconsistency?

Tweeted twitter.com/#!/StackPhilosophy/status/200907045812174848
edited tags
Link
Cody Gray
  • 5.4k
  • 1
  • 42
  • 44

Roughly, GodelGödel demonstrated that in a logical system, that is similarcontains a model or as rigorous as mathematicsarithmetic, there are statements which maybemay be true, but are unprovable, within the system. 

If a statement is not provable an inconsistency or self-contradiction may or will develop that invalidates the system. ArrivalArrival at this point then demonstrates that a system has been considered or examined sufficentlysufficiently to move on. Should arrival at this point be the focus for examination of any system?

Roughly, Godel demonstrated that in a logical system, that is similar or as rigorous as mathematics, there are statements which maybe true, but are unprovable, within the system. If a statement is not provable an inconsistency or self-contradiction may or will develop that invalidates the system. Arrival at this point then demonstrates that a system has been considered or examined sufficently to move on. Should arrival at this point be the focus for examination of any system?

Roughly, Gödel demonstrated that in a logical system, that contains a model or arithmetic, there are statements which may be true, but are unprovable within the system. 

If a statement is not provable an inconsistency or self-contradiction may or will develop that invalidates the system. Arrival at this point then demonstrates that a system has been considered or examined sufficiently to move on. Should arrival at this point be the focus for examination of any system?

Source Link
E Toohery
  • 131
  • 1
  • 4
Loading