Why we shouldn't fault Lucas and Penrose for continuing to believe in the Goedelian argument against computationalism

Details Why we shouldn't fault Lucas and Penrose for continuing to believe in the Goedelian argument against computationalism Why we shouldn't fault Lucas and Penrose for continuing to believe in the Goedelian argument against computationalism

2006-07-14

arxiv.org/abs/math/0607333v1

Mathematics

General Mathematics

22 pages; an HTML version is available at http://alixcomsi.com/Why%20we%20shouldnt.htm

Scientific paper

The only fault we can fairly lay at Lucas' and Penrose's doors, for
continuing to believe in the essential soundness of the Goedelian argument, is
their naive faith in, first, non-verifiable assertions in standard expositions
of classical theory, and, second, in Goedel's unvalidated interpretation of his
own formal reasoning. We show why their faith is misplaced in both instances.

Affiliated with

Also associated with

No associations

Rating

Why we shouldn't fault Lucas and Penrose for continuing to believe in the Goedelian argument against computationalism does not yet have a rating. At this time, there are no reviews or comments for this scientific paper.

If you have personal experience with Why we shouldn't fault Lucas and Penrose for continuing to believe in the Goedelian argument against computationalism, we encourage you to share that experience with our LandOfFree.com community. Your opinion is very important and Why we shouldn't fault Lucas and Penrose for continuing to believe in the Goedelian argument against computationalism will most certainly appreciate the feedback.

Rate now

Comments { 0 }

Profile ID: LFWR-SCP-O-97187