Minds, Machines and Gödel

Etica E Politica 5 (1):1 (1961)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

In this article, Lucas maintains the falseness of Mechanism - the attempt to explain minds as machines - by means of Incompleteness Theorem of Gödel. Gödel’s theorem shows that in any system consistent and adequate for simple arithmetic there are formulae which cannot be proved in the system but that human minds can recognize as true; Lucas points out in his turn that Gödel’s theorem applies to machines because a machine is the concrete instantiation of a formal system: therefore, for every machine consistent and able of doing simple arithmetic, there is a formula that it can’t produce as true but that we can see to be true, and so human minds and machines have to be different. Lucas considers as well in this article some possible objections to his argument: for any Gödelian formula we could, for instance, construct a machine able to produce it or we could put the Gödelian formulae that we had proved as axioms of a further machine. However - as Lucas underlines - for every of such machines we could again formulate another Gödelian formula, the Gödelian formula of these machines, that they are not able to proof but that we can recognize as true. More general arguments, such as the possibility to escape Gödelian argument by suggesting that Gödel’s theorem applies to consistent systems while we could be inconsistent ones, are moreover refuted by Lucas by maintaining that our inconsistency corresponds to occasional malfunctioning of a machine and not to his normal inconsistency; indeed, a inconsistent machine is characterized by producing any statement, on the contrary human being are selective and not disposed to assert anything.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,322

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Godel's theorem and mechanism.David Coder - 1969 - Philosophy 44 (September):234-7.
Minds, Machines, and Gödel: A Retrospect.J. R. Lucas - 1996 - In Raffaela Giovagnoli (ed.), Etica E Politica. Clarendon Press. pp. 1.
The mind's I has two eyes.J. Martin & K. Engleman - 1990 - Philosophy 65 (264):510-515.
Minds, machines and Godel: A reply to mr Lucas.C. Whitely - 1962 - Philosophy 37 (January):61-62.
Lucas against mechanism.David Lewis - 1969 - Philosophy 44 (June):231-3.
Lucas against mechanism II.David Lewis - 1979 - Canadian Journal of Philosophy 9 (June):373-6.
Lucas against Mechanism: a Rejoinder.John Lucas - 2003 - Etica E Politica 5 (1):1.
McCall’s Gödelian Argument is Invalid.Panu Raatikainen - 2002 - Facta Philosophica 4 (1):167-69.

Analytics

Added to PP
2015-02-02

Downloads
228 (#85,156)

6 months
46 (#86,030)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

Minds, brains, and programs.John Searle - 1980 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 3 (3):417-57.
The singularity: A philosophical analysis.David J. Chalmers - 2010 - Journal of Consciousness Studies 17 (9-10):9 - 10.
Against the singularity hypothesis.David Thorstad - forthcoming - Philosophical Studies.
What can we know about unanswerable questions?Thomas Raleigh - forthcoming - Philosophical Quarterly.

View all 146 citations / Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references