←back to thread

Gettiers in software engineering (2019)

(jsomers.net)
303 points FigurativeVoid | 1 comments | 14 Oct 24 18:28 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
mihaic ◴[15 Oct 24 09:46 UTC] No.41846803[source]▶
After Godel published his landmark incompleteness proof, that a logical system can't be complete and also without any internal inconsistencies, I would have expected this to trickle into philosophical arguments of this type.

I see no practical usefulness in all of these examples, except as instances of the rule that you can get correct results from incorrect reasoning.

replies(1): >>41847300 #
dist-epoch ◴[15 Oct 24 11:07 UTC] No.41847300[source]▶
Philosophy is quite far away from pure math for Godel's argument to really matter.
replies(1): >>41847404 #
mihaic ◴[15 Oct 24 11:29 UTC] No.41847404[source]▶
Why though? You lose quite a bit of credibility when you say that theorems that apply to any system of logic don't apply to you in any way.
replies(3): >>41847711 #>>41847762 #>>41847817 #
1. rnhmjoj ◴[15 Oct 24 12:23 UTC] No.41847817{3}[source]▶
Note that Gödel's incompleteness theorems do not apply to just any system of logic: they are about particular formal systems that can prove certain facts about the arithmetics of integers. So, for them to fail, it doesn't even take a non-mathematical formal system, just something that has nothing to do with natural numbers, for example, Euclidean geometry, which happens to be fully decidable.