Godel, the Mind, and the Laws of Physics

In Matthias Baaz (ed.), Kurt Gödel and the foundations of mathematics: horizons of truth. New York: Cambridge University Press. pp. 339 (2011)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Gödel appears to have believed strongly that the human mind cannot be explained in terms of any kind of computational physics, but he remained cautious in formulating this belief as a rigorous consequence of his incompleteness theorems. In this chapter, I discuss a modification of standard Gödel-type logical arguments, these appearing to strengthen Gödel’s conclusions, and attempt to provide a persuasive case in support of his standpoint that the actions of the mind must transcend computation. It appears that Gödel did not consider the possibility that the laws of physics might themselves involve noncomputational procedures; accordingly, he found himself driven to the conclusion that mentality must lie beyond the actions of the physical brain. My own arguments, on the other hand, are from the scientific standpoint that the mind is a product of the brain’s physical activity. Accordingly, there must be something in the physical actions of the world that itself transcends computation. We do not appear to find such noncomputational action in the known laws of physics, however, so we must seek it in currently undiscovered laws going beyond presently accepted physical theory. I argue that the only plausibly relevant gap in current understanding lies in a fundamental incompleteness in quantum theory, which reveals itself only with significant mass displacements between quantum states (“Schrödinger’s cats”). I contend that the need for new physics enters when gravitational effects just begin to play a role. In a scheme developed jointly with Stuart Hameroff, this has direct relevance within neuronal microtubules, and I describe this (still speculative) scheme in the following.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 92,227

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Yesterday’s Algorithm: Penrose and the Gödel Argument.William Seager - 2003 - Croatian Journal of Philosophy 3 (9):265-273.
Gödel’s Incompleteness Theorems and Physics.Newton C. A. Da Costa - 2011 - Principia: An International Journal of Epistemology 15 (3):453-459.
In defense of psychological laws.Martin Carrier - 1998 - International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 12 (3):217-232.
Laws in Physics.Mathias Frisch - 2014 - European Review 22:S33-S49.
How the laws of physics lie.Nancy Cartwright - 1983 - New York: Oxford University Press.
The fundamental laws of physics can tell the truth.Renat Nugayev - 1991 - International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 5 (1):79 – 87.
Godel and Physics.John D. Barrow - 2011 - In Matthias Baaz (ed.), Kurt Gödel and the foundations of mathematics: horizons of truth. New York: Cambridge University Press. pp. 255.

Analytics

Added to PP
2014-01-28

Downloads
232 (#87,796)

6 months
30 (#106,968)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Roger Penrose
University of California, Irvine

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references