Gödel limits formal systems not machine implementations

Physical machines that can implement numerous formal systems transcend the limitations that Gödel’s theorem places upon formal systems.

The Gödel sentence for some formal system only limits a machine while it is implementing that formal system. But when the machine is implementing some other formal system, the machine may be able to prove the previous system's Gödel sentence.

Daniel Dennett (1972).


Notes
:
  • Dennett presents this argument as a special case in his broader discussion of how a physical object can implement various Turing machines.
  • Also see the "Is the brain a computer?" arguments on Map 1, the "Functional states generate consciousness?" argument on Map 6, and sidebar "Formal Systems: An Overview" on this map.
RELATED ARTICLESExplain
Artificial Intelligence
Are thinking computers mathematically possible? [7]
No: computers are limited by Gödel's theorems
Gödel limits formal systems not machine implementations
Highly flexible systems aren't mechanistic
Daniel Dennett
Theorems show limitations of machine thought
Gödel shows machines can't be fully conscious
Argument from Gödel's theorem is dialectical
Mathematical insight is non-algorithmic
Improved machines
The problem of consistency
Lucas may be a Turing machine
Lucas tricks machines into contradicting themselves
Some people cannot understand Gödel's theorem
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