Given the coherence theory of truth, new propositions must observe previous theory and logic (i.e. every thinking step must be consistent with rules of logic); many analytic philosophies believe it is possible to write an effective procedure/algorithm which use current knowledge to produce new knowledge such as those philosophies that support cognitive science.

My question is 'How do they advocate we best formalize thinking, and will this formalization guarantee the best possible thinking procedure (best in terms of ability to produce/discover new knowledge) in the lens of the psychology of normative thinking?

I'm seeking answers to throw light on the philosophy of knowledge (scientific or otherwise) and how computers automate reasoning effectively.

  • Perhaps your question could be better expressed as "How can we refine thinking?" ...or perhaps, "What irreducible functions constitute thinking?" – elliot svensson Jan 14 '19 at 21:25
  • @elliotsvensson That is the first question. Will defining the 'refining process' help? – Ajax Jan 14 '19 at 21:29
  • I'm hoping for a restatement of the title question so that it's more likely for you to get, "what's the algorithm" -type answers instead of "you can't define yourself" -type answers. – elliot svensson Jan 14 '19 at 21:47
  • Are you asking about the P vs NP problem? – Richard Jan 14 '19 at 21:59
  • 1
    @Ajax read about Turing and the P vs NP problem. He tried to establish whether any arbitrary piece of code would error or not... It sounds like what you're asking. – Richard Jan 14 '19 at 22:27

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.