Theory is inconsistent
Suppose T is a formal AI theory for Knowledge Representation. T contains a distinguished 1-place predicate symbol K (included in the Gödel numbering scheme), where K(???) is intended to formalize the idea that sentence ? is known. Suppose further that the diagonal function is representable in the system, and that the logic of the knowledge predicate includes the general principles:
(*) ?T K(???) ? ? , since knowledge is considered to be factive, and
(**) if ?T ?, then ?T K(???) , which is intended to capture the idea that if a statement is proven then it is known.
How do we show that the resulting formal theory of Knowledge Representation is inconsistent.
(*) ?T K(???) ? ? , since knowledge is considered to be factive, and
(**) if ?T ?, then ?T K(???) , which is intended to capture the idea that if a statement is proven then it is known.
How do we show that the resulting formal theory of Knowledge Representation is inconsistent.
Comments (2)
Attack of the killer robots?
???????????????????????????