3 ms·

Thanks for the response Professor. What do you make of the following article though? It concludes that the critique is not devastating to Gödel http://wab.uib.

Thanks for the response Professor. What do you make of the following article though? It concludes that the critique is not devastating to Gödel http://wab.uib.no/agora/tools/alws/collection-6-issue-1-article-6.annotate http://wab.uib.no/agora/tools/alws/collection-6-issue-1-arti...

ProfHewitt 6y ago
Unfortunately, the author Timm Lampert did not quote the most powerful Wittgenstein proof that existence of I'mUnprovable means that mathematical foundations are inconsistent. Wittgenstein's more powerful version is much more devastating. As mentioned previously in this discussion, the following article explains why I'mUnprovable must not and does not exist in foundations: "Recrafting Foundations of Mathematics" https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=3603021 https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=3603021