might have been done by any number of fanatics (Castro, Hitler, Putin, whoever) — Tom Storm
The effectiveness of math can be demonstrated through its consistency and predictability. — Tom Storm
https://www.hawking.org.uk/in-words/lectures/godel-and-the-end-of-physics
What is the relation between Godel’s theorem and whether we can formulate the theory of the universe in terms of a finite number of principles? One connection is obvious. According to the positivist philosophy of science, a physical theory is a mathematical model. So if there are mathematical results that can not be proved, there are physical problems that can not be predicted.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaos_theory
Chaos theory is an interdisciplinary area of scientific study and branch of mathematics. It focuses on underlying patterns and deterministic laws of dynamical systems that are highly sensitive to initial conditions. These were once thought to have completely random states of disorder and irregularities.[1] Chaos theory states that within the apparent randomness of chaotic complex systems, there are underlying patterns, interconnection, constant feedback loops, repetition, self-similarity, fractals and self-organization.[2]
even within the single religion. It is unpredictable and inconsistent.
Yet when you reason, you can change your beliefs. Naturally we do start from our premises, the things we assume to be true. But if by reasoning we come to the conclusion that our starting assumptions were wrong, we change them.Without basic beliefs, reason is not possible.
Therefore, there is no such sharp distinction between reason and faith. — Tarskian
looks a bit... overstated.PA is a chaotic complex system without initial conditions. — Tarskian
Aren't these the "initial conditions"...? These are the Peano axioms:
Zero is a natural number.
Every natural number has a successor in the natural numbers.
Zero is not the successor of any natural number.
If the successor of two natural numbers is the same, then the two original numbers are the same.
If a set contains zero and the successor of every number is in the set, then the set contains the natural numbers.
It's far from obvious what this has to do with chaotic systems.
I'm not following Tarskian's argument at all. — Banno
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-standard_model_of_arithmetic
In mathematical logic, a non-standard model of arithmetic is a model of first-order Peano arithmetic that contains non-standard numbers. The term standard model of arithmetic refers to the standard natural numbers 0, 1, 2, …. The elements of any model of Peano arithmetic are linearly ordered and possess an initial segment isomorphic to the standard natural numbers. A non-standard model is one that has additional elements outside this initial segment. The construction of such models is due to Thoralf Skolem (1934).
That the conclusions follow from the premises can be said about every fiction book — Lionino
If you had actually read the "article" you linked, you would know that Gödel's original axioms are inconsistent — Lionino
Well,
PA is a chaotic complex system without initial conditions. — Tarskian
looks a bit... overstated. — Banno
http://www.sci.brooklyn.cuny.edu/~noson/True%20but%20Unprovable.pdf
We have come a long way since Gödel. A true but unprovable statement is not some strange, rare phenomenon. In fact, the opposite is correct. A fact that is true and provable is a rare phenomenon. The collection of mathematical facts is very large and what is expressible and true is a small part of it. Furthermore, what is provable is only a small part of those.
They are not inconsistent. There may be an issue of modal collapse but Curtis Anderson proposed a fix for that. It is not a major problem. — Tarskian
In terms of logic, we have: yes, no, maybe. The view you describe is a maybe. In my opinion, that is perfectly fine. — Tarskian
Contrary to what the weekly sophist implies, choice of axioms is not arbitrary. — Lionino
As previously stated, you have not read the article you yourself linked. Congrats. — Lionino
perhaps due simply to a complete lack of interest — Janus
So you would have 'don't care' mapped to unknown? — Tom Storm
For the indifferent or one who finds the question incoherent it is not a matter of truth value, and that is the point. So, Joshs "none of the above": seems most apt. — Janus
The existential claim carries the onus probandi (generally, existential claims are verifiable and not falsifiable, universal claims are falsifiable and not verifiable), it's not for someone else to disprove. — jorndoe
By the way, atheists really need to prove that they are not making use of omniscience for their impossibility claim that an omniscient entity does not exist. This burden is on them and not on us. — Tarskian
Out of interest, what type of believer are you? Muslim or Christian, or something less specific? — Tom Storm
Charles V's "Edict of Blood" of 1550 in the Burgundian Netherlands
No one shall print, write, copy, keep, conceal, sell, buy or give in churches, streets, or other places, any book or writing made by Martin Luther, John Oecolampadius, Huldrych Zwingli, Martin Bucer, John Calvin, or other heretics reprobated by the Holy Church.
...
That such perturbators of the general quiet are to be executed, to wit: the men with the sword and the women to be buried alive, if they do not persist in their errors; if they do persist in them, then they are to be executed with fire; all their property in both cases being confiscated to the crown.
Existential proofs are much easier to produce than impossibility proofs. — Tarskian
vague unknown [...] contenders [...] a difference that makes a difference
The existential claim carries the onus probandi [...] Upon repeated failure, expect disregard/dismissal of the claim — above
So, my sympathies are definitely much more Muslim nowadays. So, the problem is not necessarily Christianity but the lack of enthusiasm of the Christians. But then again, they completely mishandled the reformation too. — Tarskian
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.