Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Feasibility bounds are theory-relative and agent-relative... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→The theory PA^F, though technically inconsistent, is practically consistent because any proof of a contradiction in PA^F must be infeasibly long.

    Feasibility bounds are theory-relative and agent-relative, so 'infeasibly long' lacks the objective standing required for a logical property like consistency.

    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    1 reason against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Logical properties like consistency must transcend particular agents' computational limits, or they become mere psychological facts rather than objective truths.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A proof that is infeasible for humans but feasible for superintelligences cannot ground consistency claims in the proof itself—only in the agent's capacities.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Theory-relative feasibility means consistency depends on which framework we adopt, undermining its status as a mind-independent, objective logical property.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Consistency is a structural property of logical relations between propositions, independent of whether any agent can verify it—like mathematical truth itself.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Feasibility constraints concern our epistemic access to logical facts, not the facts themselves; confusing them conflates metaphysics with cognitive limits.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If consistency lacked objective standing due to feasibility bounds, no formal system could reliably be called consistent—a self-refuting consequence.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Connections

    2 topics

    Truth & Knowledge1 linkedModality & Possibility1 linked

    Related

    A proof that is infeasible for humans but feasible for superintelligences cannot...Consistency is a structural property of logical relations between propositions, ...Feasibility constraints concern our epistemic access to logical facts, not the f...If consistency lacked objective standing due to feasibility bounds, no formal sy...
    +3 moreShow less
    Logical properties like consistency must transcend particular agents' computatio...The theory PA^F, though technically inconsistent, is practically consistent beca...Theory-relative feasibility means consistency depends on which framework we adop...

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    2 (1 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit