[FOM] Response / critical review of Franzen's Gödel book
silver_1 at mindspring.com
Wed Mar 28 20:53:13 EDT 2012
What exactly is meant by "serious" abuses of G's thms? I'm puzzled, since throwing around mistaken versions of G's th'm, Russell's Paradox, Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle etc., are ubiquitous. I wouldn't know what would make them "serious". It seems clear to me that the purpose writers have in alluding to these principles is simply to appear impressive to their audience. Sokal & Bricmont indicate that flawed technical references often achieve this purpose.
On Mar 26, 2012, at 6:28 PM, // ravi wrote:
> [to the moderators: apologies if this is outside the scope of this list]
> Hello all,
> while I have come across many positive reviews of Torkel Franzén’s "Gödel’s Theorem: An Incomplete Guide to Its Use and Abuse” such as Panu Raatikainen’s in the AMS (http://www.ams.org/notices/200703/rev-raatikainen.pdf), searches do not yield any critical treatment of the book or a defence by those [implicitly] accused of “abuse” of the result(s). I am curious if there are any serious ones and I would greatly appreciate any pointers.
> FOM mailing list
> FOM at cs.nyu.edu
More information about the FOM