I consider that interpretation of Gödel's Incompleteness Theorem to be
faulty. There is no credible evidence that humans need something
beyond the purely computational to decode language, and it is pretty
clear that humans are able to decode human language well; however,
sometimes inherent disambiguities in the language force us to request
clarification. Not perfect, but life goes on.
Human language just *isn't* perfectly logical: a lot of the
information is conveyed by choice of words, connotations, inflection
, context and innuendo. This part of the information contents is
mostly fuzzy and often ambiguous.
-hpa
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/