LEADER 04360nam a22005535i 4500
001 814927
003 TR_AnAIT
005 20260130213212
007 cr nn 008mamaa
008 130305s1980 ne | s |||| 0|eng d
020 |a9789401576536|9978-94-015-7653-6
024 7 |a10.1007/978-94-015-7653-6|2doi
041 |aeng
049 |aTürk Tarih Kurumu Kütüphanesi
050 4|aBD418-418.84
072 7|aHPM|2bicssc
072 7|aPHI015000|2bisacsh
072 7|aQDTM|2thema
082 04|a128.2|223
090 |aDK/16164
100 1 |aWebb, J.|eauthor.|4aut|4http://id.loc.gov/vocabulary/relators/aut
245 10|aMechanism, Mentalism and Metamathematics|h[electronic resource] :|bAn Essay on Finitism /|cby J. Webb.
250 |a1st ed. 1980.
264 1|aDordrecht :|bSpringer Netherlands :|bImprint: Springer,|c1980.
300 |aXIII, 285 p.|bonline resource.
336 |atext|btxt|2rdacontent
337 |acomputer|bc|2rdamedia
338 |aonline resource|bcr|2rdacarrier
347 |atext file|bPDF|2rda
490 1 |aSynthese Library, Studies in Epistemology, Logic, Methodology, and Philosophy of Science,|x2542-8292 ;|v137
505 0 |aI / Mechanism: Some Historical Notes -- II / Mind, Number, and the Infinite -- III / the Mental, the Finite, and the Formal -- IV / Effectiveness Mechanized -- Concluding Summary -- Index of Names -- Index of Subjects.
520 |aThis book grew out of a graduate student paper [261] in which I set down some criticisms of J. R. Lucas' attempt to refute mechanism by means of G6del's theorem. I had made several such abortive attempts myself and had become familiar with their pitfalls, and especially with the double­ edged nature of incompleteness arguments. My original idea was to model the refutation of mechanism on the almost universally accepted G6delian refutation of Hilbert's formalism, but I kept getting stuck on questions of mathematical philosophy which I found myself having to beg. A thorough study of the foundational works of Hilbert and Bernays finally convinced me that I had all too naively and uncritically bought this refutation of formalism. I did indeed discover points of surprisingly close contact between formalism and mechanism, but also that it was possible to under­ mine certain strong arguments against these positions precisely by invok­ ing G6del's and related work. I also began to realize that the Church­ Turing thesis itself is the principal bastion protecting mechanism, and that G6del's work was perhaps the best thing that ever happened to both mechanism and formalism. I pushed these lines of argument in my dis­ sertation with the patient help of my readers, Raymond Nelson and Howard Stein. I would especially like to thank the latter for many valuable criticisms of my dissertation as well as some helpful suggestions for reor­ ganizing it in the direction of the present book.
532 8 |aAccessibility summary: This PDF is not accessible. It is based on scanned pages and does not support features such as screen reader compatibility or described non-text content (images, graphs etc). However, it likely supports searchable and selectable text based on OCR (Optical Character Recognition). Users with accessibility needs may not be able to use this content effectively. Please contact us at accessibilitysupport@springernature.com if you require assistance or an alternative format.
532 8 |aInaccessible, or known limited accessibility
532 8 |aNo reading system accessibility options actively disabled
532 8 |aPublisher contact for further accessibility information: accessibilitysupport@springernature.com
650 0|aPhilosophy of mind.
650 0|aScience|xPhilosophy.
650 14|aPhilosophy of Mind.
650 24|aPhilosophy of Science.
710 2 |aSpringerLink (Online service)
773 0 |tSpringer Nature eBook
776 08|iPrinted edition:|z9789027710468
776 08|iPrinted edition:|z9789048183579
776 08|iPrinted edition:|z9789401576543
830 0|aSynthese Library, Studies in Epistemology, Logic, Methodology, and Philosophy of Science,|x2542-8292 ;|v137
856 40|uhttps://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-7653-6
912 |aZDB-2-SHU
912 |aZDB-2-SXPR
912 |aZDB-2-BAE
950 |aHumanities, Social Sciences and Law (SpringerNature-11648)
950 |aPhilosophy and Religion (R0) (SpringerNature-43725)