4 ms·
> Gödel responded "Oh, yes, I can prove it," but the judge declined to pursue the matter. Such a mundane judge. It's as if someone says to a physicist "I have
by jimmyed 6y ago
> Gödel responded "Oh, yes, I can prove it," but the judge declined to pursue the matter.
Such a mundane judge.
It's as if someone says to a physicist "I have the General Unified Theory" and they decide to not listen to it.
- alimw 6y agoIf a truly ingenious method exists, probably best that nobody knows about it! Thankfully the current crop of would-be American dictators doesn't look smart enough to figure one out for themselves. (Brute force remains an option.)
- guerrilla 6y ago> It's as if someone says to a physicist "I have the General Unified Theory" and they decide to not listen to it. That happens all the time. The probably judge ignored Gödel for the same reason physcists ignore cranks.
- seanhunter 6y agoRealistically this is more akin to a physicist hearing from a non-physicist they have a design for a perpetual motion machine and declining to pursue it. Gödel was clearly a giant in his field but here he is completely outside of the rubric of things he was familiar with. Specifically the constitution describes a political system not a logical one and while logic is important for the law, it does not describe anything like a formal system of logic (in the mathematical sense). Judges are also incredibly busy and they probably had a huge caseload to deal with and little time right then for a detailed constitutional debate.