Could Godel's Incompleteness Theorem Cause Me To Go Insane?

Question

As a student of philosophy, I have a tendency to think abstractly A LOT. In reading a book recently that relied on philosophy, I found out about Kurt Godel's Incompleteness Theorem(s). After further researching it, I found it basically says that logic cannot prove itself. Now, on its own, I'm ok with that; I accept the majority view that this points to some larger system beyond logic itself. However, when I now try to abstract with Godel's theorem in mind, I feel like I get stuck in an infinite loop of contradictions. I want to grow in knowledge by incorporating Godel into my thought process, but I don't know how to do so without encountering all of these contradictions.

Basically, since I don't think I can stop reasoning anymore without thinking about Godel's theorem, I'm afraid that I'll go insane. I know Godel went insane himself and eventually died of starvation. Yes, I know people say it was a fear of being poisoned that did him in, but was it his work on the incompleteness theorem that drove him to that irrational edge in the first place?

I'm simply asking if there is a way for me to incorporate Godel's theorem into reasoning processes that don't ultimately result in a contradiction?

Answer 1

Gödels incompleteness theorem simply says that for any sufficiently strong system, there are true statements that cannot be proven. All you need to do is accept that. I guess your problem is with the fact that you NEED it to be complete?



My problem is that I am wondering WHY you need to incorporate that into your thought system. All it means is that everything true cannot be proven. But there shouldn't be a problem there, right? And there isn't a CONTRADICTION. Only an incompleteness. Where do you think the contradiction is?



There is no contradiction in that. It just leads to other ways of thinking. That is what lead us to a LOT of progress in mathematics, such as irrational (ok maybe not the best term LOL) and even different types of geometries, many of which are useful for understanding nature.



Just relax and take it a little less seriously.

Answer 2

https://www.facebook.com/pages/The-New-Centre-for-Research-Practice/268554213346104?fref=ts



Don t listen to these cats! Come check out the Spring seminar, which is a series of lessons in how to utilize the incompleteness theorem not in-itself, but as a representation of the system-function and how it integrally breaks down at a certain point in space-time but that the breaking-down is a misnomer-it is really shedding symbolic order in order to expose itself to the Real. Discursiveness and dialectic are used to triangulate time within space. Specifically see the courses on Diagonalisation (what you are doing, whether you know it or not, when you hit the rock bottom (rock-bottom as far as infinitude goes :) of the incompleteness theorem) and New Materialism (the ontology of this new space), and the interaction of the two within the spontaneous generation of myth(separating our myth cognition from our myth REcognition) and the artistic impulse. Get on it!



YOU ARE NOT CRAZY. OR WE ALL ARE! Either way nobody wins! Yay!

Answer 3

If you fear for your sanity, may i suggest the book "Zen Training: Methods and Philosophy" by the late Katsuki Sekida. I found relevance therein during a crisis.

Answer 4

Nope, sorry dude but there isn't really any way to accept it without contradicting your self. I'm afraid you are doomed to insanity.

Answer 5

I highly doubt insanity....but it sounds unreasonable why can logic not prove itself b/c it has no one to prove it it sounds lk he was a schizophrenic so I wouldn't take his teachings to heart