X-Message-Number: 10220 Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1998 07:28:03 -0700 From: Rand Simberg <> Subject: More Incompleteness Bob Ettinger wrote: >But to see the failure of the point made by Mr. Simberg >(and Mr. Delaney etc.), we don't need any really sophisticated >argument. Basically, advocates of the "rational" approach >(which includes almost everyone in almost every practical >situation) are simply saying that you have the best chance >(or your prediction has the best chance) if you allow yourself >to be guided by experience (and if you are honest and thorough >and competent in your evaluation of experience). But this begs the question, "best chance" of *what*? If your most fundamental goal is to get into a Christian heaven, science and rationality do nothing to aid you in that. If you accept them, they may demonstrate to you that your goal is wrong, but in that case, you've then changed your values. The point is that values are not provable or derivable, they are intrinsically axiomatic. Goedel proved that some things are unprovable, and, uncomfortable though it may seem to those whose religion is rationalism (I fall into this category myself), this seems like an obvious result to me. ************************************************************************ * 310 372-7963 (CA) 307 739-1296 (Jackson Hole) interglobal space lines * 307 733-1391 (Fax) http://www.interglobal.org "Extraordinary launch vehicles require extraordinary markets..." Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=10220