Le 24-mars-06, à 15:40, [EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit :
> Of course, we can't be sure when we close ourselves in from any
> explanation that is "meaningless".
> We can run but we cannot hide from the fact that we will always have to
> make assumptions that are without basis. Even when we close ourselves
> in from any explanation that is not based on what we can grasp with our
> brains, that step itself is ultimately unsupported. This is what I've
> called rationalism *in a closed system*. Rationalism in a closed
> system, the supposed path to autonomy from the transcendent, itself
> requires faith.
Rationalism itself requires faith, and so can be open. Only "total"
form of rationalism are closed, but then non universal, as surely
number theory of computer science are when they are not identified with
such and such machine or formal theory. This explains why machines
cannot not evolve.
The openness is a consequence of the closure of the comp realm for the
diagonalization procedure, what smullyan explains much to quickly in
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to firstname.lastname@example.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at