38 ideas
| 21752 | Prior to Gödel we thought truth in mathematics consisted in provability [Gödel, by Quine] |
| 17835 | Gödel show that the incompleteness of set theory was a necessity [Gödel, by Hallett,M] |
| 21695 | The set scheme discredited by paradoxes is actually the most natural one [Quine] |
| 21693 | Russell's antinomy challenged the idea that any condition can produce a set [Quine] |
| 17886 | The limitations of axiomatisation were revealed by the incompleteness theorems [Gödel, by Koellner] |
| 10071 | Second Incompleteness: nice theories can't prove their own consistency [Gödel, by Smith,P] |
| 19123 | If soundness can't be proved internally, 'reflection principles' can be added to assert soundness [Gödel, by Halbach/Leigh] |
| 10621 | Gödel's First Theorem sabotages logicism, and the Second sabotages Hilbert's Programme [Smith,P on Gödel] |
| 17888 | The undecidable sentence can be decided at a 'higher' level in the system [Gödel] |
| 21691 | Antinomies contradict accepted ways of reasoning, and demand revisions [Quine] |
| 21690 | Whenever the pursuer reaches the spot where the pursuer has been, the pursued has moved on [Quine] |
| 21689 | A barber shaves only those who do not shave themselves. So does he shave himself? [Quine] |
| 21694 | Membership conditions which involve membership and non-membership are paradoxical [Quine] |
| 21692 | If we write it as '"this sentence is false" is false', there is no paradox [Quine] |
| 10132 | There can be no single consistent theory from which all mathematical truths can be derived [Gödel, by George/Velleman] |
| 3198 | Gödel showed that arithmetic is either incomplete or inconsistent [Gödel, by Rey] |
| 10072 | First Incompleteness: arithmetic must always be incomplete [Gödel, by Smith,P] |
| 9590 | Arithmetical truth cannot be fully and formally derived from axioms and inference rules [Gödel, by Nagel/Newman] |
| 11069 | Gödel's Second says that semantic consequence outruns provability [Gödel, by Hanna] |
| 10118 | First Incompleteness: a decent consistent system is syntactically incomplete [Gödel, by George/Velleman] |
| 10122 | Second Incompleteness: a decent consistent system can't prove its own consistency [Gödel, by George/Velleman] |
| 10611 | There is a sentence which a theory can show is true iff it is unprovable [Gödel, by Smith,P] |
| 10867 | 'This system can't prove this statement' makes it unprovable either way [Gödel, by Clegg] |
| 8747 | Realists are happy with impredicative definitions, which describe entities in terms of other existing entities [Gödel, by Shapiro] |
| 5791 | Reduction is either by elimination, or by explanation [Searle] |
| 5799 | Eliminative reduction needs a gap between appearance and reality, as in sunsets [Searle] |
| 5790 | A property is 'emergent' if it is caused by elements of a system, when the elements lack the property [Searle] |
| 5792 | Explanation of how we unify our mental stimuli into a single experience is the 'binding problem' [Searle] |
| 5786 | A system is either conscious or it isn't, though the intensity varies a lot [Searle] |
| 5794 | Consciousness has a first-person ontology, which only exists from a subjective viewpoint [Searle] |
| 5795 | There isn't one consciousness (information-processing) which can be investigated, and another (phenomenal) which can't [Searle] |
| 5788 | The use of 'qualia' seems to imply that consciousness and qualia are separate [Searle] |
| 3192 | Basic logic can be done by syntax, with no semantics [Gödel, by Rey] |
| 5789 | I now think syntax is not in the physics, but in the eye of the beholder [Searle] |
| 5798 | Consciousness has a first-person ontology, so it cannot be reduced without omitting something [Searle] |
| 5787 | There is non-event causation between mind and brain, as between a table and its solidity [Searle] |
| 5797 | The pattern of molecules in the sea is much more complex than the complexity of brain neurons [Searle] |
| 5796 | If tree rings contain information about age, then age contains information about rings [Searle] |