So given EY’s post about supernaturalism, if reductionism is true then we can’t imagine anything that truly forms non reducible strata, there is only one strata that composes everything. Presumably, the laws this strata follow are supposed to be mathematical.
Consequently, Godel’s incompleteness theorem (GIT) soundly refutes reductionism, right? I know GIT is becoming cliche and all, so bringing it up as a counter is perceived as anti-intellectual, but really, you can’t just say a problem ceases to be a problem if it gets repeated too much.
So given EY’s post about supernaturalism, if reductionism is true then we can’t imagine anything that truly forms non reducible strata, there is only one strata that composes everything. Presumably, the laws this strata follow are supposed to be mathematical.
Consequently, Godel’s incompleteness theorem (GIT) soundly refutes reductionism, right? I know GIT is becoming cliche and all, so bringing it up as a counter is perceived as anti-intellectual, but really, you can’t just say a problem ceases to be a problem if it gets repeated too much.
The universe cannot prove everything about itself. Reduction does not claim it should. Theorem satisfied.