Philosophia Mathematica 15 (2):193-226 (2007)
|Abstract||Proofs of Gödel's First Incompleteness Theorem are often accompanied by claims such as that the gödel sentence constructed in the course of the proof says of itself that it is unprovable and that it is true. The validity of such claims depends closely on how the sentence is constructed. Only by tightly constraining the means of construction can one obtain gödel sentences of which it is correct, without further ado, to say that they say of themselves that they are unprovable and that they are true; otherwise a false theory can yield false gödel sentences|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Neil Tennant (2001). On Turing Machines Knowing Their Own Gödel-Sentences. Philosophia Mathematica 9 (1):72-79.
Andrzej Mostowski (1952/1982). Sentences Undecidable in Formalized Arithmetic: An Exposition of the Theory of Kurt Gödel. Greenwood Press.
Francesco Berto (2009). The Gödel Paradox and Wittgenstein's Reasons. Philosophia Mathematica 17 (2):208-219.
Stewart Shapiro (2002). Incompleteness and Inconsistency. Mind 111 (444):817-832.
Hirohiko Kushida (2010). The Modal Logic of Gödel Sentences. Journal of Philosophical Logic 39 (5):577 - 590.
Gregor Damschen (2011). Questioning Gödel's Ontological Proof: Is Truth Positive? European Journal for Philosophy of Religion 3 (1):161-169.
G. Sereny (2011). How Do We Know That the Godel Sentence of a Consistent Theory Is True? Philosophia Mathematica 19 (1):47-73.
Panu Raatikainen (2005). On the Philosophical Relevance of Gödel's Incompleteness Theorems. Revue Internationale de Philosophie 59 (4):513-534.
Peter Milne (2007). On Gödel Sentences and What They Say. Philosophia Mathematica 15 (2):193-226.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads41 ( #32,659 of 722,873 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #36,757 of 722,873 )
How can I increase my downloads?