Results for: godel s theorem
Video results for: godel s theoremMore results from video 
The Absolute Truth about Absolute Truths A reply to a thoughtful email, below, by an anonymous atheist writer. Subtracted are identifying (More) A reply to a thoughtful email, below, by an anonymous atheist writer. Subtracted are identifying markers and, hopefully, no loss of meaning. Parts were removed to meet YT's character limit.
Freetaught's response to this email: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9efQhA1v-qQ
"[...]I want to agree with you regarding the tremendous value of science at both a practical and personal/experiential level[...]I'd like to address the limitations of science[...], but please realize that I am NOT arguing here, in any way, for religious dogma, religious inspiration, supernaturalism of ANY sort, etc[...]These issues are moot to me, except for the ways in which those who hold these beliefs affect others and the world[...]
It seems to me that we cannot escape the fact that our scientific descriptions are always from a human perspective and, thus, will always be limited. Science does not, cannot, and should not make Absolute Truth claims; science can only posit 'little t' truth claims that are WITHIN the human perspective. Even our descriptions of, say, gravity on earth or how insects pollinate are FROM our human perspective. We cannot KNOW the Absolutely True nature of things, or even if such a 'nature' exists. Perhaps a description from any 'being' is incomplete and will be a function of perspective. (I'm thinking about Godel's incompleteness theorem here as well as the Flatland dimensional beings--each being having their own description as a function of their existence.)
Furthermore, it seems to me that the scientific method itself assumes criteria for evaluating hypotheses and discerning claims that are true/false. It assumes, for example, that repeatability demonstrates truth; anomalies are false[...]and that theories must be consistent with one another in order to be true; if not, there's a falsehood somewhere along the line. Of course, there's good REASON for these assumptions![...]But, alas, they are still assumptions.
I suggest that if a scientist ever claimed that a particular description is Absolute Truth or that the scientific method is a way for discovering Absolute Truth, THAT would involve faith. I'm NOT talking about the kind of revision that occurs in science here. I'm attempting to address a deeper issue. ALL scientific descriptions--even our BEST[...]are FROM a human perspective[...]
Thinking about these issues results in a kind of profound agnosticism for me. (I am NOT talking about GOD(s) here but about our deep inability to 'know' Absolute Truth and if it exists[...])This experience seems analogous to the 1-d being attempting to understand a 2nd dimension. Or attempting to create a question that is NOT dualistic in nature. It's like one's head is up against a wall--and we want to see beyond the wall--but due to the limitations of our existence/experience/brain, we can't see or understand. Even many of our scientific descriptions today are not comprehensible in the fullest sense[...]
In thinking about the limitations of science[...], I'd like also to bring to the fore the value of the arts. Music, poetry, literature, visual arts bring to us an holistic experience that transcends description. Why, for example, does reading a poem have such a profound effect upon us as humans? Why doesn't the author simply describe the theme in an expository manner? Something is lost in the experience.
In the same vein, experiencing[...],'being with the moon at night' or 'walking in the garden' results in a kind of profound, holistic experience for me. Sure, I frequently think about how the moon is sustained in orbit by gravitational forces or the description of how the sunflower turns its head toward the sun[...]And while "thoughts about" CAN enhance one's experience, I find simple experience just as profound[...]What I'm attempting to describe here is analogous to[...]listening to Beethoven's 9th, tapping one's foot mindlessly, and being with the music versus deconstructing the 9th to understand its nuances. The latter can enhance the former, but certainly not necessarily. I think there are folks who sometimes get so caught up in the deconstruction, they miss the music. The same MAY be true for folks who are completely caught up in the deconstruction[...]of the physical world.
I spoke earlier about the problem of creating a question that is not dualistic in nature, or-if I may use the expression-a question that 'transcends' dualism. It seems to me that the EXPERIENCE of, say, walking in the garden or listening to music is neither true nor false. Now, thoughts ABOUT these experiences, the mental maps that we construct, have lower-case true/false value...but perhaps the experience itself, in a way, transcends dualism.
[...]Frequently, when I talk about the limitations of science, religionists will chime in and claim, "See! My god COULD be true!"[...]This is clearly a misstep, and you are obviously well aware of the problems associated with these claims[...]" (Less)
Saving Computer Science from Incompleteness Theorems In this video we question an often expressed opinion that Godel's incompleteness theorems (More) In this video we question an often expressed opinion that Godel's incompleteness theorems implies the limitations of the human mind and intelligence. Our opinion here is that such a view is untenable. By necessity, a video cannot possibly get into the subtle issues involved in mathematical logic. For more details, the interested reader should see the paper "Real Set Theory" at www.e-atheneum.net (Less)
Bookmark FilesTube
Link to FilesTube
Show your support by placing a link to filestube.com on your website and favorite forums.
