Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-tn8tq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-17T09:38:41.906Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Metamathematics and the Philosophy of Mind

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 March 2022

Judson Webb
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The metamathematical theorems of Gödel and Church are frequently applied to the philosophy of mind, typically as rational evidence against mechanism. Using methods of Post and Smullyan, these results are presented as purely mathematical theorems and various such applications are discussed critically. In particular, J. Lucas's use of Gödel's theorem to distinguish between conscious and unconscious beings is refuted, while more generally, attempts to extract philosophy from metamathematics are shown to involve only dramatizations of the constructivity problem in foundations. More specifically, philosophical extrapolations from metamathematics are shown to involve premature extensions of Church's thesis.

Type
Research Article
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 35 , Issue 2 , June 1968 , pp. 156 - 178
Copyright
Copyright © 1968 The Philosophy of Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

†

I wish to thank my teacher Dr. Raymond Nelson for encouragement and many helpful discussions on the topics treated. He is, of course, not thereby responsible for my errors.

References

[1] Church, A., “An Unsolvable Problem of Elementary Number Theory,” American Journal of Mathematics, vol. 58, 1936, pp. 345–363.10.2307/2371045CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[2] Church, A., Review of Copi (1949) and Turquette (1950), Journal of Symbolic Logic, vol. 16, 1951, pp. 221–222.Google Scholar
[3] Copi, I. “Modern Logic and the Synthetic A Priori,” Journal of Philosophy, vol. 46, 1949, pp. 243–245.10.2307/2019891CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[4] Copi, I., “Gödel and the Synthetic A Priori: a Rejoinder,” ibid., vol. 47, 1951, pp. 633–636.Google Scholar
[5] Gödel, K., On Formally Undecidable Propositions of Principia Mathematica and Related Systems, Oliver and Boyd, 1962.Google Scholar
[6] Gödel, K. “Über eine bischer noch nicht benützte Erweiterung des finiten Standpunktes,” Dialectica, vol. 12, 1958, pp. 280–287.10.1111/j.1746-8361.1958.tb01464.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
[7] Goodstein, R. “The Significance of Incompleteness Theorems,” British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, vol. 14, 1963, pp. 208–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[8] Kalmar, L., “An Argument Against the Plausibility of Church's Thesis,” in Constructivity in Mathematics (ed. A. Heyting), North Holland, 1959, pp. 72–80.Google Scholar
[9] Kleene, S., “Recursive Predicates and Quantifiers,” Transactions of the American Mathematical Society, vol. 53, 1943, pp. 41–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[10] Kleene, S., Introduction to Metamathematics, North Holland and Van Nostrand, 1952; second printing 1957.Google Scholar
[11] Kreisel, G., “Note on Arithmetic Models for Consistent Formulae of the Predicate Calculus,” Fundamenta Mathematica, vol. 37, 1950, pp. 265–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[12] Kreisel, G., “The Diagonal Method in Formalized Arithmetic,” British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, vol. 3, 1952, pp. 364–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[13] Kreisel, G., “Hilbert's Programme,” Dialectica, vol. 12, 1958, pp. 346–372.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[14] Kreisel, G., “Mathematical Logic,” in Lectures on Modern Mathematics (ed. Saaty, T. L.), Wiley, 1965, pp. 95–195.Google Scholar
[14a] Lob, M. H., in Journal of Symbolic Logic, vol. 20, p. 115.Google Scholar
[15] Lucas, J., “Minds, Machines and Gödel,” Philosophy, Vol. XXXVI, References herein are to the reprint in Minds and Machines (ed. A. Anderson), Prentice-Hall, 1964, pp. 43–60.Google Scholar
[16] Myhill, J., “Some Philosophical Implications of Mathematical Logic,” Review of Metaphysics, vol. 6, 1952, pp. 169–198. (See also Benes, Philosophical Studies, vol. 4, 1953, pp. 56–88; Myhill, ibid., vol. 5, 1954, pp. 47–48.)Google Scholar
[17] Post, E. L., “Recursively Enumerable Sets of Positive Integers and Their Decision Problems,” Bulletin of the American Mathematical Society, vol. 50, 1944, pp. 284–316.10.1090/S0002-9904-1944-08111-1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[18] Rosenbloom, P., Elements of Mathematical Logic, Dover, 1950.Google Scholar
[19] Smart, J., “Gödel's Theorem, Church's Theorem and Mechanism,” Synthese, vol. 13, 1961, pp. 105–110.10.1007/BF00634578CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[20] Smullyan, R., Theory of Formal Systems, Annals of Mathematics Studies, 47, Princeton University Press, 1962, second printing.Google Scholar
[21] Turing, A. M., “On Computable Numbers, with an application to the Entscheidungsproblem,” Proceedings of the London Mathematical Society, vol. 42, 1937, pp. 230–265. (Also ibid., vol. 43, pp. 544–546.)10.1112/plms/s2-42.1.230CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[22] Turquette, A., “Gödel and the Synthetic A Priori,” Journal of Philosophy, vol. 47, 1950, pp. 125–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[23] Wang, H., Survey of Mathematical Logic, North Holland, 1964.Google Scholar
[24] Watson, A., “Mathematics and its Foundations,” Mind, vol. 7, 1938, pp. 440–451.10.1093/mind/XLVII.188.440CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[25] Wilder, R., Introduction to the Foundations of Mathematics, Wiley, 1965, second edition.Google Scholar