X-Message-Number: 4140
From: Peter Merel <>
Subject: SCI.CRYONICS Diagonalizing Robert Ettinger
Date: Mon, 3 Apr 1995 20:46:52 +1000 (EST)

Robert Ettinger writes,

>I suggest that a statement is meaningful only if IN PRINCIPLE it can be
>tested or verified. 
...
>This does not exhaust the possibilities, of course, but as far as I know
>there is no example of a statement that "should" be regarded as clearly
>meaningful, yet is clearly unverifiable in principle. Perhaps a reader will
>supply his favorite example (not counting Goedelian "examples").

An obvious statement that springs to mind is "Robert Ettinger cannot
find this statement to be both true and meaningful". There are three
evaluations that Bob might make of it: 1) Bob finds it meaningless;
then it is meaningful and true. 2) Bob finds it meaningful and false; 
then it is meaningful and true. 3) bob finds it meaningful and true; 
then it is meaningful and false ... 

Constructing this sort of statement is of course Goedelian, but what Goedel
also showed is that it is impossible to add axioms to a formal system that is 
vulnerable to Godelian incompleteness so as to preclude the construction of 
inconsistent statements. Therefore I hope that Bob will forgive me 
disregarding his parentheses.

In a non-Goedelian vein, I have to ask Bob whether he regards the statement 
"Every person contains a self-circuit that cannot be uploaded into a computer"
to be meaningful or not. If he thinks that it is, then I'd like his opinion
on the statment "every person possesses an immortal soul that survives after
their death". 

>If I had the time to pay very close attention and follow up and fill in the
>background, maybe it would turn out to be all hand-waving. But if I had to
>make a bet, I would bet that Mr. Bozzonetti might occasionally bag us some
>game.

I can only agree; my question is why Bozzonetti restricts his 
audience to this forum - I'd pay good money to read his stuff.

--

Internet:           |         Accept Everything.            |

http://www.usyd.edu.au/~pete/          |         Reject Nothing.               |

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=4140