>Here is someone proclaiming to be a scientist, and then throwing out proclamations of ‘truth’ not backed by evidence. Goedel proved logically that any axiomati

>Here is someone proclaiming to be a scientist, and then throwing out proclamations of ‘truth’ not backed by evidence. Goedel proved logically that any axiomatic system of information exchange can have truths that are not provable. The trouble with this argument is that Goedel's proof relies on systems which can model Peano arithmetic; in particular, it assumes that the system deals with numbers that are arbitrarily large. For example, Goodstein's theorem, the commonly-stated simplest unprovable theorem, depends on a function like this: f(2) = 19, f(3) = 7.6 × 10^12, f(4) = 1.3 × 10^154, ... Most numbers in sociology are not so large. The number of possible subsets of the human population is between f(7) and f(8). Additionally, theorems about discrete systems do not always apply to continuous systems. For example, the theory of real closed fields is decidable: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real_closed_field http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real_closed_field Most undecidable statements depend on things that look vaguely Diophantine, but sociology is rarely Diophantine. Rather, it tends be that approximately a solution is still kind of a solution.