Therefore, computational intractability reveals a gap between idealized logical omniscience and real epistemic agents, confirming rather than dissolving the tension the claim identifies.

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

No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

Computational intractability(as the hidden problem obscured by the label 'decidable'): A situation where a problem is theoretically solvable but practically impossible because it would take an unreasonably long time or too many resources for a computer to actually solve it.
Epistemic agents(the main subjects doing the tracking in this statement): People or beings who seek knowledge and try to figure out what's true and what they can justifiably believe.
Gap between idealized and real(as used in this argument about perfect logic versus human reasoning): A difference between how things work in perfect theory versus how they actually work in the real world with real limitations.
epistemology(Contrasted with purely descriptive scientific inquiry): A normative enterprise that tells us how we ought to reason from evidence and how we ought to justify our beliefs, as distinct from merely describing how we do reason or justify beliefs

Based on where you are in your exploration