Re: [Marxism] Re: [PEN-L] More Godel

[Rod Holt <rholt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I am grateful for Jim Farmelant quick response. I made the mistake of
running off hunting for my copies of Gödel's stuff and Kleene's book. My
life is in boxes in a dozen storage lockers with the inventories reading
"six boxes of books," "Books and papers, 10 boxes," etc. It's awful.
It was a real pleasure to read Gödel again. The translation is not
familiar to me and the notation is non-standard (at least in the English
world) so it takes a bit of getting used to. There are parts that need
unraveling a bit, and some preliminary concepts will help comrades. This
I will get to as fast as possible.
         thanx, rod

Jim Farmelant wrote:

> On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 11:15:15 -0800 Rod Holt <rholt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> writes:
>
>
> > 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?
>
>
> Kurt Gödel's paper, "On formally  undecidable propositions
> of Principia Mathematica and related systems," can
> be found online at:
> http://home.ddc.net/ygg/etext/godel/godel3.htm
> It probably won't hurt to have a good grasp of
> predicate logic, set theory, and the theory of recursive
> functions to understand Gödel's proof, although
> the underlying idea is not that hard to grasp, which
> is that just as Russell and Whitehead were able to
> show that the axioms of Arithmetic could be formulated
> in the notation of mathematical logic, so the propositions
> of Russell & Whitehead's mathematical logic could
> be formulated in terms of the arithmetic of natural
> numbers.
_______________________________________________
Marxism mailing list
Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism