Mechanism, truth, and Penrose's new argument (Q1871136)
From MaRDI portal
scientific article
Language | Label | Description | Also known as |
---|---|---|---|
English | Mechanism, truth, and Penrose's new argument |
scientific article |
Statements
Mechanism, truth, and Penrose's new argument (English)
0 references
6 May 2003
0 references
The author investigates and criticizes in great detail Penrose's later (1994) argument against computer mechanism [see Sections 3.16 and 3.23 of \textit{R. Penrose}'s book, Shadows of the mind. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press (1995; Zbl 0847.00001)]. Recall that anti-mechanist approaches to modeling the human mind began with J. R. Lucas in 1961. They were significantly extended by Penrose in 1989. Both approaches hinge on the belief that the incompleteness of arithmetic provides all the logical, philosophical, and rational resources necessary to refute any claim made by a computer mechanist. In the present paper, the author vigorously defends the view that Penrose's new argument seems to invoke an unrestricted truth predicate and an unrestricted knowability predicate. However, then the premises are inconsistent. Further, he challenges anti-mechanists to provide a sound argument that does not use unrestricted truth and knowability predicates.
0 references
incompleteness of \(A^2\)
0 references
Gödelian consequences
0 references
truth theory
0 references
intensional mathematics
0 references
computer mechanism
0 references
Lucas
0 references
Penrose
0 references