‘It’s all over’ — Gödel’s incompleteness theorems
30 June, 2015 at 15:49  Posted in Theory of Science & Methodology  3 Comments
Advertisements
3 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Recent Posts
 Simon WrenLewis — flimflam defender of economic orthodoxy
 Keynes’ devastating critique of econometrics
 RBC models — the art of missing the point completely
 Robert Lucas and the triumph of empty formalism
 Solow kicking Lucas and Sargent in the pants
 When your day is night alone (personal)
 The logical fallacy that good science builds on
 Cutting wages is not the solution
 Goodness of fit
 Debunking the NAIRU myth
 Big Data — poor science
 Nostalgin var bättre förr …
 Modern macroeconomics — too much micro and not enough macro
 New Keynesian DSGE models and the ‘representative lemming’
 Paul Samuelson’s balanced budget religion
Comments Policy
I like comments. Follow netiquette. Comments — especially anonymous ones — with pseudo argumentations, abusive language or irrelevant links will not be posted. And please remember — being a fulltime professor leaves only very limited time to responding to comments.Recent Comments
Ralph Musgrave on Simon WrenLewis — flimf… Nanikore on Keynes’ devastating crit… John Zelnicker on RBC models — the art of… Ramanan on Simon WrenLewis — flimf… patrick newman on Debunking the NAIRU myth Kingsley Lewis on Debunking the NAIRU myth David Chester on Cutting wages is not the … Nick Johnson on Cutting wages is not the … Martin Kullberg on Debunking the NAIRU myth Jerry Brown on Debunking the NAIRU myth sferguson78 on Debunking the NAIRU myth Ralph Musgrave on Debunking the NAIRU myth Jerry Brown on Debunking the NAIRU myth Ralph Musgrave on Debunking the NAIRU myth antireifier on Debunking the NAIRU myth Reading List
Blogroll
Categories
 Economics (2,245)
 Education & School (152)
 Politics & Society (560)
 Statistics & Econometrics (425)
 Theory of Science & Methodology (292)
 Varia (662)
Archives
 February 2017 (33)
 January 2017 (58)
 December 2016 (65)
 November 2016 (59)
 October 2016 (42)
 September 2016 (45)
 August 2016 (42)
 July 2016 (57)
 June 2016 (45)
 May 2016 (45)
 April 2016 (43)
 March 2016 (70)
 February 2016 (59)
 January 2016 (42)
 December 2015 (33)
 November 2015 (58)
 October 2015 (63)
 September 2015 (47)
 August 2015 (35)
 July 2015 (43)
 June 2015 (50)
 May 2015 (50)
 April 2015 (46)
 March 2015 (54)
 February 2015 (41)
 January 2015 (55)
 December 2014 (51)
 November 2014 (53)
 October 2014 (56)
 September 2014 (53)
 August 2014 (71)
 July 2014 (73)
 June 2014 (51)
 May 2014 (47)
 April 2014 (39)
 March 2014 (53)
 February 2014 (55)
 January 2014 (51)
 December 2013 (71)
 November 2013 (62)
 October 2013 (80)
 September 2013 (78)
 August 2013 (45)
 July 2013 (55)
 June 2013 (40)
 May 2013 (44)
 April 2013 (48)
 March 2013 (58)
 February 2013 (41)
 January 2013 (49)
 December 2012 (67)
 November 2012 (63)
 October 2012 (71)
 September 2012 (78)
 August 2012 (38)
 July 2012 (76)
 June 2012 (116)
 May 2012 (67)
 April 2012 (49)
 March 2012 (43)
 February 2012 (35)
 January 2012 (46)
 December 2011 (39)
 November 2011 (68)
 October 2011 (61)
 September 2011 (63)
 August 2011 (53)
 July 2011 (21)
 June 2011 (30)
 May 2011 (49)
 April 2011 (45)
 March 2011 (19)
Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.
Entries and comments feeds.
Economics, Gödel, and a wouldbe field day for mathLuddites
Comment on ‘It’s all over — Gödel’s incompleteness theorems’
.
“But lots of people have misused Gödel’s theory.” (Tony Mann, Gödel’s incompleteness theorem, youtube, 5:01)
.
There have always been lots of people who had considerable trouble with the clearcut truth claim of mathematics. For one reason or another they prefer the realm of vagueness, ambivalence, indeterminism, fogginess, wishwash, inconclusiveness, twilight, uncertainty, where “… nothing is clear and everything is possible.” (Keynes, 1973, p. 292)
.
For these people, who are at least mildly antiscientific, science itself offered two godsents: Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle and Gödel’s incompleteness theorem. These masterpieces of pure logic seemed to establish an ecological niche where true and false overlap, where contradictions can peacefully coexist, and where opinion and knowledge are equal. Tortured souls hailed von Neumann’s “It’s all over” as the end of their nightmare and the licence for anythinggoes.
.
What von Neumann, who was for a time member of the most ambitious program in mathematics, meant was that Hilbert’s goal of a complete proof of all mathematical truths was unattainable. What Gödel had shown was that there are true propositions that cannot be proved within a given consistent formal system. This was by no stretch of imagination the end of mathematics because there are many, many proposition that can be proved. And this invalidated none of the propositions that had already been proved since the days of Euclid. So Pythagoras’s theorem still stands after Gödel.
.
Gödel had used Hilbert’s axiomaticdeductive method to demonstrate that the axiomaticdeductive method has limits. To conclude from this demonstration that the method is inapplicable in economics is a gross logical blunder of the mathLuddites.
.
To tell the logically handicapped majority of economists of the limits of logic and mathematics is to warn a snail that it will encounter an absolute limit when it approaches the speed of light.
.
“In hindsight, the basic idea at the heart of the incompleteness theorem is rather simple. Gödel essentially constructed a formula that claims that it is unprovable in a given formal system. … Thus there will always be at least one true but unprovable statement.” (Wikipedia)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kurt_G%C3%B6del
.
The problem of economics is not that there is one true but unprovable statement. To the contrary, the problem is that there is not one true and provable statement.
.
The curious thing is that there are so many economists who are quite content with this deplorable state of affairs.
.
Egmont KakarotHandtke
.
References
Keynes, J. M. (1973). The General Theory of Employment Interest and Money.
The Collected Writings of John Maynard Keynes Vol. VII. London, Basingstoke:
Macmillan. (1936).
.
*See also
http://axecorg.blogspot.com/2015/04/theinsignificanceofgodelstheorem.html
http://axecorg.blogspot.com/2014/12/axiomatizationcrossreferences.html
Comment by Egmont KakarotHandtke— 30 June, 2015 #
Possibly the problem with economics is that it has a great deal of what Keynes called pseudomathematics, and what little mathematics there is has largely been distorted into pseudomathematics.
Comment by Dave Marsay— 1 July, 2015 #
Is this relevant to economics? How?
Comment by Dave Marsay— 1 July, 2015 #