Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id IAA19865 (8.6.9/5.3[ref email@example.com] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from firstname.lastname@example.org); Wed, 6 Feb 2002 08:12:43 GMT Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2002 00:07:00 -0800 Message-Id: <email@example.com> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: binary X-Mailer: MIME-tools 4.104 (Entity 4.116) X-Originating-Ip: [220.127.116.11] From: "Joe Dees" <firstname.lastname@example.org> To: email@example.com Subject: Re: Tipping Point author in town Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: email@example.com('binary' encoding is not supported, stored as-is)
> <AaronLynch@aol.com>Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2002 23:45:54 EST
> Re: Tipping Point author in town firstname.lastname@example.orgReply-To: email@example.com
>In a message dated 2/4/2002 10:02:47 PM Central Standard Time, Joe Dees
>> >OK, for the moment, let's assume he will have no idea what the Godelian
>> >threshold is- could you send me a nicely phrased, quickly asserted,
>> >question I could rehearse and learn?
>> >All the while realizing that I will be among a group of remarkable
>> >miscellany, as I'm sure you're aware.
>> Godel's Incompleteness Theorems I and II are the most important in 20th
>> century mathematics. It is asserted that beyond a certain level of
>> complexity, that any axiomatic system contains undecideable statements; the
>> reason for this is the emergence of self-reference in complex systems.
>> postulate axiomatic system A, and state that all true statements, and only
>> true statements, are inside A. Now let us construct statement B. B is
>> recursive and self-referential; that is, it refers to its own relation with
>> axiomatic system A, and what it contends is that "B is not an axiom of A".
>> What has happened here? If we include B in A, then B contains the false
>> statement that B is not an axiom of A, and thus does not contain only true
>> statements, but if we exclude B from A, then A does not contain all true
>> statements, for it does not include the true statement that B is not an
>> of A. To put it plainly, B either belongs BOTH inside and outside A, or
>> NEITHER inside nor outsi!
>> de A, and the dilemma is unresolveable within system A. B is undecideable
>> with reference to A. The bottom drops out; mathematics is revealed as a
>> But in reference to the universe A, WE are B, for we are within a universe
>> that we nevertheless entertain a perspectival (point of) view upon; in
>> words, Krishnamurti notwithstanding, as far as self-conscious awareness
>> within our environs goes, we are at once NOT and NOT-NOT the world ("Neti,
>> neti." (Not this, not that). Mind and world are not one, not two, not
>> but are components of a dynamic and recursive interrelational system.
>> hope this helps.
>It would help a lot more if Douglas Hofstadter were giving the talk!
>Yee-HAAAA! But do you agree?
>This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
>Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
>For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
Looking for a book? Want a deal? No problem AddALL!
http://www.addall.com compares book price at 41 online stores.
This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Feb 06 2002 - 08:26:28 GMT