From: Ben Goertzel (email@example.com)
Date: Fri May 26 2006 - 06:01:36 MDT
IMO, you're way off; the issues with superrationality are far simpler
than anything Godelian in nature...
On 5/25/06, Psy Kosh <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> On the topic of the math of supperationality, a possibly stupid
> question, but would Godel's results have any impact?
> What I mean is, from what I understand, in some systems, if you even
> internally take as an explicit axiom that the system is consistent,
> that may break the system.
> But doesn't superrationality kind of work by explicitly stating
> consistancy of rationality and going to consequences of that? ie, the
> basic examples work by saying "If all involved are maximally rational,
> then all of us will come to the same conclusion, therefore...", but
> that's basically an assertion of consistancy, and using that directly,
> while it seems reasonable, I'm wondering if there may be some sneaky
> Godelian "trap" lurking somewhere along the line?
> Or am I way way off on this?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:00:56 MDT