Re: [Marxism] More Godel

[Rod Holt <rholt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Thanks for the reply. I am humbled-some. I taught some of this stuff 40
years ago, but I never did this without the give and take of bright
students. Writing a textbook is an art I doubt I possess. I can start in
and see how it goes. I have always believed that at root, there are no
"difficult" ideas. And all those used by metamathematicians and Gödel
are easy, in my opinion.
But, since it has been some years, give me some time, a couple of days,
to figure where to start. Too, we don't have mathematical symbols for
e-mail here. I remember when Kleene lectured, he would use different
color chalk to indicate hierarchies within a system, its meta-system,
its meta-meta-system, etc. Not only do we talk about what we're talking
about but we talk about that too.
      --rod


Charles Brown wrote:

> Rod Holt Friends one & all:
> Any body who says "... Gödel kicked the whole [formalist program] over,"
> and then goes on to Hofsteader make me stop reading.
> I have a question: Why don't people read GÖDEL in stead of reading about
> him? Why don't Marxists take a little time off and learn a little
> mathematics, or at least enough to know the difference between "True"
> and "derivable," between logic and metalogic??
>
> ^^^^
> CB: We were hoping that in a sort of socialist division of mental labor, you
> could tell us these, (or tell us again; sometimes it takes repetition in
> learning) since you learned 'em.
>
> ^^^^^^^
>
>
> Does anybody here know what a Gödel number is? If not, then avoid
> propounding on Gödel, the dialectic, etc. ad nausium.
>       --rod
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Marxism mailing list
> Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism
_______________________________________________
Marxism mailing list
Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism