Oh! I’d be very interested to know the original if anyone can find it, then! Would like my version to point there. @ESYudkowsky, do you know?
This comes after a hundred pages explaining all the ways logicism is wrong, so I think in context there will be little room for readers to misunderstand it as anything other than a satire, based on the obvious fact that there is no meaningful doubt about multiplication.
-
-
I’m not worried about the reader doubting multiplication, I’m worried about spreading the common misconception that PA cannot be proven consistent. It can be, and the proof reduces to a proposition that can be made wordlessly self-evident, like the termination of a hydra game.
-
OK… this is something I am not at all worried about. (Possibly interesting generalization: the sorts of things you and I worry about are different although not disjoint.)
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.