![[info]](http://p-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small}
Goedel, Moore, and Where the Hell Did My Hands Go?
Definitions:
Moorean Shift- an epistemic responce to skepticism where one denies conclusion C when he is more certain that C is false than he is the premises are true . . . in other words, when somone comes up with these really good arguments that say you don't exist and you can't argue with them because their premises are true but you still reject the conclusion becase you feel certain that you exist
Goedel's Incompleteness Therom (as i have been taught)- the proof that demonstrates that any system that has a complete set of axioms will be inconsistent with itself, in other words, if some system of belief says that it is a complete set (i.e. logic) than within that system there will be inconsistencies, and if you want coherence then you have to deal with incompleteness
Blog
Oh Existential Crisis you always show up at my door at the most inopportune moments. It seems as soon i'm sure of something (or to my epistemologist friends as soon as i am certain or have justified true belief etc.) it always comes to some obtrusive halt. yes i'm going to continue to go to college and get my degree and move on to more education from there but what for? today, it's because society tells me to.
There is such a vast supply of knowledge to be had in any given discipline it's just like why study any of this. unless i can get to the end and add something new will i really have accomplished anything. the only thing that's keeping me going is the fact that i can apply the Moorean Shift to the conclusion that i should just give up even though i can't argue with the premises that make that conclusion necessary.
well as for now i'll keep plugging away until i come up with a new reason. and while goedel makes want to be smarter, moore says that i don't have to be. i think jesus told me something once. . .
Moorean Shift- an epistemic responce to skepticism where one denies conclusion C when he is more certain that C is false than he is the premises are true . . . in other words, when somone comes up with these really good arguments that say you don't exist and you can't argue with them because their premises are true but you still reject the conclusion becase you feel certain that you exist
Goedel's Incompleteness Therom (as i have been taught)- the proof that demonstrates that any system that has a complete set of axioms will be inconsistent with itself, in other words, if some system of belief says that it is a complete set (i.e. logic) than within that system there will be inconsistencies, and if you want coherence then you have to deal with incompleteness
Blog
Oh Existential Crisis you always show up at my door at the most inopportune moments. It seems as soon i'm sure of something (or to my epistemologist friends as soon as i am certain or have justified true belief etc.) it always comes to some obtrusive halt. yes i'm going to continue to go to college and get my degree and move on to more education from there but what for? today, it's because society tells me to.
There is such a vast supply of knowledge to be had in any given discipline it's just like why study any of this. unless i can get to the end and add something new will i really have accomplished anything. the only thing that's keeping me going is the fact that i can apply the Moorean Shift to the conclusion that i should just give up even though i can't argue with the premises that make that conclusion necessary.
well as for now i'll keep plugging away until i come up with a new reason. and while goedel makes want to be smarter, moore says that i don't have to be. i think jesus told me something once. . .