Reminder

[Anonymous No.22974879]

This guy is such a hack that he tried to dismiss Gödel's incompleteness theorems (one of the most profound results in mathematical logic and foundations) from having read only the abstract alone. This faggot and his master, Russell, got so BTFOd by Gödel it's not even funny.

[Anonymous No.22974913]

who gives a fuck about the Tractatus-era Wittgenstein?

[Anonymous No.22974942]

>>22974879
Was Russell ever even opposed to Gödel's theorem?

[Anonymous No.22974944]

>>22974879
holy based. STEMfags need to be culled

[Anonymous No.22974947]

>>22974913
Cope. Remarks on the Foundations of Mathematics was being written around the same time as Philosophical Investigations. Seethe.

[Anonymous No.22975035]

>>22974942
How could anyone be opposed to it especially someone as knowledgeable as Russel. The proof is so elementary it should be in Erdös's book. But if I remember correctly he had mostly moved on from that particular topic by the time the proof was submitted, mostly because the topic of the Mathematica brought back some trauma and rightly so, that shit was brutal for them both (mostly Russel since Whitehead was cucking him lul)

[Anonymous No.22975059]

>>22974879
All I know about this dude is that he got a PHD without even getting a bachelors so he must be pretty smart

[Anonymous No.22975108]

>>22974879
If you look at the actual argument I think Wittgenstein basically just made an assumption that the incompleteness theorem was being presented as some sort of Logic killer or something that could bring physics to a halt, and it is in fact neither of those things. Wittgenstein turns it into some sort of paradoxical statement like that though in his argument, which was a mistake on his part but I wouldn't exactly say that Godel BTFO Russell and Wittgenstein any more than he BTFO of physics or computation for that matter. Wittgenstein was certainly in the wrong on his assumption but in all fairness even today people misunderstand the incompleteness theorem and still make the same assumptions about it.

[Anonymous No.22976980]

>>22975108
He's not most people though, most people are retards, he's le logic man and he didn't even bother to read his proof which is literally just a diagonal argument.

[Anonymous No.22976992]

>>22976980
Everyone makes mistakes.

[Anonymous No.22977053]

>>22976992
Not everyone. Plenty of unborn babies don't make any mistakes.

[Anonymous No.22978952]

>>22975059
He was also a ueber rich Jew so that doesn't mean much...

[Anonymous No.22979012]

>>22976980
Hehehehehe yes well le logic man is also on record saying that tautologies are better descriptors than they are statements of transferable fact and that logic is also more useful for describing the form of something rather than the something itself. His lecture on ethics is also somewhat contradictory for saying that there is some sort of absolute morality and then turning around and reclassifying the statement as more of an absolute recognition possessed by people to intuit when morality is being discussed rather than any sort of intrinsic morality itself. None of these statements is necessarily wrong, but they do thread a fine needle hole nonetheless. Logicians can spend their entire lives trying to find a symbolic representation to provide some sort of axiomatic tool to say what they want. Look at some of the reactions to Wittgenstein's argument against Godel to see this in action, there were people claiming he had made a profound philosophical insight. His own symbology still betrayed his assumption though. Perhaps his example is a valuable lesson to everyone that one should understand the argument they are seeking to respond to before making a response I suppose. If he had bothered to read it and understand it beforehand I doubt he would have argued against it personally but I guess we won't know.

[Anonymous No.22979014]

>>22975059
The mythology of his time at Cambridge is so strange, although I suppose it appears stranger to us now that all university education has been so standardised and regulated and bureaucratised. You could never have some Austrian engineering student speaking broken English just turn up one day to the lectures of a top Cambridge professor who is allowed to stay and read a degree merely on the basis of one piece of written work nowadays. Plus the stories of his time with the Apostles, like when he later in life threatened Karl Popper with a poker, and the fact that he attempted to submit a version of the Tractatus for his BA rather than taking exams… he lived a really strange and wonderful life.

[Anonymous No.22979080]

>>22974879
what are you talking about, the Tractatus and the incompleteness theorem say the same thing