Gödel’s theorem is not decisive

The question of whether thinking is algorithmic can't be decided on the basis of Gödel’s theorem (see detailed text).

1) No mathematical insight is necessary to construct Gödel sentences.
 
2) Mathematical insight is involved only in seeing that the system that produces the Gödel sentence is consistent.

3) But, insight into consistency is not reliable—as is shown by numerous historical examples.

4) Because insight into consistency is unreliable, we can't know whether Gödel’s theorem applies to a given system, and we don't know that mathematical insight is non-algorithmic.

Martin Davis (1990).

Note: Also see the "Is the use of consistency in the Lucas argument problematic?" arguments on this map.
RELATED ARTICLESExplain
Artificial Intelligence
Are thinking computers mathematically possible? [7]
No: computers are limited by Gödel's theorems
Mathematical insight is non-algorithmic
The absurdity of algorithmic insight
Gödel’s theorem is not decisive
Insight is essential even if it is fallible
Penrose can't argue for his hypothesis
Graph of this discussion
Enter the title of your article


Enter a short (max 500 characters) summation of your article
Enter the main body of your article
Lock
+Comments (0)
+Citations (0)
+About
Enter comment

Select article text to quote
welcome text

First name   Last name 

Email

Skip