Views
Graph
Explorer
Focus
Down
Load 1 level
Load 2 levels
Load 3 levels
Load 4 levels
Load all levels
All
Dagre
Focus
Down
Load 1 level
Load 2 levels
Load 3 levels
Load 4 level
Load all levels
All
Tree
SpaceTree
Focus
Expanding
Load 1 level
Load 2 levels
Load 3 levels
Down
All
Down
Radial
Focus
Expanding
Load 1 level
Load 2 levels
Load 3 levels
Down
All
Down
Box
Focus
Expanding
Down
Up
All
Down
Page ✓
Article
Outline
Document
Down
All
Canvas
Time
Timeline
Calendar
Request email digest
Past 24 hours
Past 2 days
Past 3 days
Past week
Add
Add page
Add comment
Add citation
Edit
Edit page
Delete page
Share
Link
Bookmark
Embed
Social media
Login
Member login
Register now for a free account
🔎
Informal proof
TegenArgument
1
#1108
A machine could, in principle, construct an informal proof of the truth of the Gödel sentence. So long as the machine doesn't regard such informal persuasions as proof proper, introducing them into its system won't lead to inconsistency.
So a, self-referential machine may recognise the truth of its own Gödel sentence without using a Gödelizing operator.
Paul Benacerral (1967).
PAGE NAVIGATOR
(Help)
-
Artificial Intelligence »
Artificial Intelligence
Artificial Intelligence☜A collaboratively editable version of Robert Horns brilliant and pioneering debate map Can Computers Think?—exploring 50 years of philosophical argument about the possibility of computer thought.☜F1CEB7
▲
Are thinking computers mathematically possible? [7] »
Are thinking computers mathematically possible? [7]
Are thinking computers mathematically possible? [7]☜Is it mathematically possible for a computer to think as well as a human can? Does the mathematics of computation contain anything to prohibit machines from thinking?☜FFB597
▲
No: computers are limited by Gödel's theorems »
No: computers are limited by Gödel's theorems
No: computers are limited by Gödel's theorems☜Gödels theorem proves that a computer cant in principle operate with human understanding (see detailed text). Gödels incompleteness theorems are the Achilles heel of mechanism. John Lucas (1961).☜59C6EF
▲
Improved machines »
Improved machines
Improved machines☜A beefed-up machine can recognise the truth of the Gödel sentence. Such a machine defeats Lucass argument, because it shows that a formal system can evade Lucass Gödelizing ability.☜EF597B
▲
Self-referential machines »
Self-referential machines
Self-referential machines☜A self-referential machine can evaluate Gödel sentences for itself. Such a machine may evade the Lucas argument.☜98CE71
▲
Gödelizing operator can defeat Lucas's argument »
Gödelizing operator can defeat Lucas's argument
Gödelizing operator can defeat Lucas's argument☜Machine with a Gödelizing operator can carry out the Gödel procedure and add all its Gödel sentences to itself as theorums. It could recognise the truth of its Gödel sentence and any subsequent Gödel sentences that could be formed about the machine.☜98CE71
▲
A self-Gödelizing machine can still be out-Gödeled »
A self-Gödelizing machine can still be out-Gödeled
A self-Gödelizing machine can still be out-Gödeled☜The Gödelizing operator—to be programmable—must be specified by some finite rule. But in that case, the Gödelizing operator is itself formalisable. The resulting system can be shown to contain a formula thats true but cant be proven in the system.☜EF597B
■
Informal proof
Informal proof☜A machine could, in principle, construct an informal proof of the truth of the Gödel sentence. So long as the machine doesnt regard such informal persuasions as proof proper, introducing them into its system wont lead to inconsistency.☜EF597B
●
Machine isn't capable of informal proof »
Machine isn't capable of informal proof
Machine isn't capable of informal proof☜A machine isnt capable of informal proof in the human sense. No matter how informal a machines reasoning may appear to be, it will still be grounded in a formal system; so its informal proofs also formalisable, and subject to the Gödel procedure.☜EF597B
Heading
Summary
Click the button to enter task scheduling information
Open
Details
Enter task details
Message text
Select assignee(s)
Due date (click calendar)
RadDatePicker
RadDatePicker
Open the calendar popup.
Calendar
Title and navigation
Title and navigation
<<
<
November 2024
>
<<
November 2024
S
M
T
W
T
F
S
44
27
28
29
30
31
1
2
45
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
46
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
47
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
48
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
49
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Reminder
No reminder
1 day before due
2 days before due
3 days before due
1 week before due
Ready to post
Copy to text
Enter
Cancel
Task assignment(s) have been emailed and cannot now be altered
Lock
Cancel
Save
Comment graphing options
Choose comments:
Comment only
Whole thread
All comments
Choose location:
To a new map
To this map
New map options
Select map ontology
Options
Standard (default) ontology
College debate ontology
Hypothesis ontology
Influence diagram ontology
Story ontology
Graph to private map
Cancel
Proceed
+Commentaar (
0
)
- Commentaar
Voeg commentaar toe
Newest first
Oldest first
Show threads
+Citaten (
0
)
- Citaten
Voeg citaat toe
List by:
Citerank
Map
+About
- About
Gemaakt door:
David Price
NodeID:
#1108
Node type:
OpposingArgument
Gemaakt op (GMT):
8/29/2006 10:10:00 PM
Laatste bewerking (GMT):
12/9/2007 4:30:00 PM
Show other editors
Inkomende kruisrelatie
0
Uitgaande kruisrelatie
0
Gemiddelde waardering:
0
by
0
gebruikers
x
Select file to upload