One Feeds Off The Other ... or what?!

[kellychaos]

Well played and I agree. Mathematical models suck. I can get a better weather forecast looking out my window.

[ziggytrix]

But I do have mathematical models of many songs on my computer.

I keep them in the folder named "mp3s".

Shit, now I'm just being contrary.

[kellychaos]

There's always room for refinement in that respect but, then, from where does to the refinement come? Surely, computers can compute more precisely and at a faster rate accoriding to set algorithms but "there is the rub". All precision is based on original programming and consequent modifications by oursleves ... which is where Godel enters the fray:

Gödel's Theorem has been used to argue that a computer can never be as smart as a human being because the extent of its knowledge is limited by a fixed set of axioms, whereas people can discover unexpected truths ... It plays a part in modern linguistic theories, which emphasize the power of language to come up with new ways to express ideas. And it has been taken to imply that you'll never entirely understand yourself, since your mind, like any other closed system, can only be sure of what it knows about itself by relying on what it knows about itself.

Are our very minds limited by language? Surely sense experience, the arts, ect supercede language but, at the same time is there a limit that language places on our very thoughts to ourselves ... i.e. our subconscious. I'm kind of daft in trying to explain myself but you get my drift, right?

[Helm]

:Godel should be an emoticon and we could just replace any post kelly makes in philo with it.

[kellychaos]

His theory intrigues me.

Can computers heighten our reality, though?

Take a simple logical algorithmic computer model, for example. You know that it's technically correct and can never be wrong as far as our human minds have thus far been able to calculate. Given that the computer is physically sound, a computer has the advantage of not only being able compute faster but also not prone to sensory distractions.

Take examples in color theory, chaos theory, ect. that have been proven by the computer. We have been given proven new information that would have taken humans months, years in some cases, to figure out and can only respond in a "Ahhh, so that's how it's done!" sort of way. This, in turn, provides a springboard to new directions of research (thought?) not previously available to us. Are we now outside the box Godel desribed?

Were we ever limited in the first place?

What would that limit be?