On what we (think we) know
On what we (think we) know

Summary/Abstract: Following seminal papers by Alan Turing, the initial stages of the computer revolution evolved from relatively simple binary logic to mind-numbing complexity, especially in recent years. This provides a basis for further discussion of rules and strategies with respect to human thinking, as well as our use and abuse of signs, and our physical world, which, after Henri Poincaré’s groundbreaking work, demonstrates that the universe doesn’t follow classical Newtonian laws to the letter. Chaos theory briefly comes into view, and with it uncertainty. Ultimately, whatever rules there may be, they cannot but remain to an extent pliable, and whatever strategies there may be, they are always changing. This flies in the face of bivalent logic, as presented in previous chapters regarding complementary coalescence, inconsistency, and incompleteness. Attention turns yet once again to the penalty kick, and then to the invention-creation-perception of change and movement, and its relevance for rules, strategies, and gut feelings for what needs to be done. Uncertainty grows, as the power of classical bivalent logic continues to wane.

• Details
• Contents