[MD] MOQ and Gödel's incompleteness theorems

[Tuukka Virtaperko]

Hi Mark, and thanks for your response!

Is it an established way of speaking that Dynamic Quality can also have 
a negative apparition?

My opinion is that while Lila is a good book for introducing MOQ to 
someone, it is a poor reference book, and I and my friend have been 
working on formulating some sort of a exact and clear expression of what 
the MOQ is about, insofar as it can be expressed.

Could you present your analogy regarding infinite set theory? Or have 
you done so elsewhere?

You say:

"Logical truths are built on a self referential system which cannot 
achieve perspective from the outside."

Agreed. In MOQ, acts whose quality is not determined by a moral system 
consisting of static intellectual value actually can have Quality, or 
they can lack Quality, but when dealing with logical systems, if a 
statement is undecidable, nothing can be stated about its truth value - 
unless we believe in mathematical realism. And even if we do, we 
apparently can't say anything very logical about the truth value.


-Tuukka



8.3.2011 18:19, 118 kirjoitti:
> Hi T,
> I believe you are touching on a distinction between Quality and Truth,
> and your analogy is interesting.  Using this form of analogy, Truth
> denotes an end point, whereas Quality denotes a tendency.  Logical
> truths are built on a self referential system which cannot achieve
> perspective from the outside.  That is, they come full circle back to
> the original assumptions, which must stand alone.  So, the assumption
> is "proved" by the assumption and that is where the notion of
> inconsistency, and unprovability comes in.  It would seem that Quality
> describes a dynamic tendency.  So I would change your sentence to say
> "if the act tends towards good, it is Dynamic Quality in its positive
> apparition.  I have a similar analogy to yours which uses the rules
> (assumptions) of infinite set theory.  A good example is the set of
> all sets.  By definition, a set cannot encompass itself.  This applies
> to the encompassing principle of Quality being everything (as a
> truth).
>
> It is important to keep in mind that our intellectual expression is a
> creative process.  We cannot find truths, only create them.
>
>   All in my opinion of course.
>
> Cheers,
> Mark
>
> On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 12:26 AM, Tuukka Virtaperko
> <mail at tuukkavirtaperko.net>  wrote:
>> It would be rather simple to argue that the dynamic-static-division in MOQ
>> is some sort of an informal application of Gödel's incompleteness theorems.
>> According to these theorems, any sufficiently powerful logical system cannot
>> prove it's own completeness unless it is inconsistent. And if a system
>> cannot prove it's own completeness, there are statements in the system which
>> cannot be proven true or false. Some sources (Wikipedia, "Gödel, Escher,
>> Bach: An Eternal Golden Braid") claim that these statements are true but
>> unprovable, but I'm under the impression that this is not the case. Instead,
>> their truth value cannot be determined. If others are in doubt, I can
>> investigate this further.
>>
>> What happens if you change "true" and "false" into "good" and "evil"? A
>> "logical system" turns into an intellectual static value pattern, and an
>> unprovable statement turns into an act whose moral value cannot be
>> determined from within the system. And if the act is good, it is Dynamic
>> Quality. This is MOQ. Right?
>>
>> -Tuukka
>> Moq_Discuss mailing list
>> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
>> Archives:
>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
>> http://moq.org/md/archives.html
>>
> Moq_Discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org/md/archives.html
>