Skip to main content
1 of 4
E Toohery
  • 131
  • 1
  • 4

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

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?

E Toohery
  • 131
  • 1
  • 4