Re: Robot Evolution



aatu.koskensilta@xxxxxxxxx wrote:-

John Edser wrote:
I do realize that enormous egos and therefore huge sums of money and
just
shocking politics become inevitably involved when asking this one simple
question:

Did Gödel prove that mathematics always was and remains to this day, a
tautology?

No politics or huge sums of money are involved. The answer to your
question is that Gödel proved nothing of that kind; what he proved is
a few technical theorems of mathematical logic.

Mr. Koskensilta,

So far you have evaded of 4 separate occasions acknowledging/repudiating the
following:

------------------------------ repost --------------------------------------

I am only referring to the logical connection between G and T and not to
what they represent because it remains irrelevant to this argument.

There are only THREE possible logical linkages:

1) G is irreversibly logically linked to T

Indicated by: G --> T

2) T is irreversibly logically linked to G

Indicated by: T --> G

Where: 1 contradicts 2 and of course 2 contradicts 1.

3) G and T remain reversibly logically linked

Indicated by: G <--> T or T <--> G

Please answer if you agree or disagree.

Since you have discounted both 1 and 2 then only 3 remains otherwise no
logical connection can exist between G and T.

If mathematics remains just a tautology (a circular argument based on
circular logic) then it cannot explain itself. Tautologies can be
continuously expanded by adding extra terms to the circular argument.
However, no matter how many extra terms become employed in this way no
tautology can ever be used to explain itself. This is because the critical
relationship between subject and predicate (where the subject must always
remain deducible from the predicate) remains impossible. This is _because_
subject and predicate can be reversed within any tautology allowing them to
_contradict_. IOW a tautology can never be self consistent.

All tautologies, no matter how complex, remain deducible from NON
tautologies. Not one single tautology exists in isolation. All of them have
to be combined with ay least one non tautology as a deduction from that non
tautology, i.e. the non tautology must PREDICATE the tautology and not the
reverse. In this way mathematics remains deducible from non mathematics. In
reference to this discussion:

G <--> T ---> X

Where: X represents an unidentified lineal (non tautological) proposition
which must exist to predicate any assumed tautology of: G_T.
--------------------------- end repost -------------------------------------

The only possible way rhetoric can appear win against reason is via evasion.
I can only conclude that your evasion of such a basic argument can only be
politically motivated bringing into doubt your claim that money and egos are
not involved.


snip<

Regards,

John Edser
Independent Researcher

edser@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx



.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: The uncorrected simplifications/oversimplifications of
    ... >>> The sciences are required to be empirically based but mathematics is ... >>> right as a theory of nature. ... >>> Hamilton's tautology for the diploid case. ... > become acceptable as a proposition of science. ...
    (sci.bio.evolution)
  • The uncorrected simplifications/oversimplifications of Hamiltons Rule (Re: Removing Lewontins Fallac
    ... >> proposition of mathematics it is not a valid proposition of science. ... There are no axiomatic truths within the sciences only within mathematics. ... Hamilton's tautology for the diploid case. ... of non random patterns in gene freq. ...
    (sci.bio.evolution)
  • Re: The uncorrected simplifications/oversimplifications of
    ... >>> The sciences are required to be empirically based but mathematics is ... >>> right as a theory of nature. ... >>> Hamilton's tautology for the diploid case. ... > become acceptable as a proposition of science. ...
    (sci.bio.evolution)
  • Re: parallels
    ... I argue Gödel proved that mathematics was and remains just a tautology does ... predicate) as to what Gödel had discovered: ... Only rationalists ask such questions (NOT logicians ...
    (sci.bio.evolution)
  • Re: Removing Lewontins Fallacy From Hamiltons Rule
    ... Converting sense in mathematics into sense within the sciences is quite ... However, because the rule remains just a tautology, it becomes impossible to ... Because Hamilton et al VERY STRICTLY define gene centricity to be the number ...
    (sci.bio.evolution)