Another interesting thing that I've learned is, the inconsistency and flaws that show up in our self-assessments neatly matches with the limitative theorems of mathematics which prove that it is not possible for any self-referential system to be able to accurately describe itself. Such a limitation has been most resoundingly made known by Godel's incompleteness theorems.
When applied to humans, the philosophical implication of this is is that self-knowledge is, fundamentally, incomplete. In other words, there is a critical point at which man's knowledge and assessments of his own self starts to become less and less reliable. There is an unsurpassable limit to exactly how far he can peer into the depths of his inner reality.
Here's a quote from an article that sheds light on the crux of this interesting idea:
Similarly, Douglas Hofstadter, in Gödel, Escher, Bach: An Eternal Golden Braid, wrote:
When applied to humans, the philosophical implication of this is is that self-knowledge is, fundamentally, incomplete. In other words, there is a critical point at which man's knowledge and assessments of his own self starts to become less and less reliable. There is an unsurpassable limit to exactly how far he can peer into the depths of his inner reality.
Here's a quote from an article that sheds light on the crux of this interesting idea:
Quote:Gödel’s theorem universally states that the formal systems that can make self reference suffer from an inherent incapability to comprehend the “self.” A formal system cannot be sure that it is consistent because the theorem “This formal system is consistent” cannot be proven inside the system, which makes the system incomplete. In fact, the existence of such a theorem is the sole source of inconsistency. Consistency and completeness are required in a formal system to reach reality. Therefore, with the ability to reflect upon itself, a formal system cannot decide on the true nature of its own reality and lacks a complete understanding of itself. The Gödelian argument applies only to systems that are rich enough to have self reference, and interestingly richness of the systems brings about its downfall. It is analogous to the concept of “critical mass” in nuclear physics. A radioactive substance will blow up only beyond a critical mass; otherwise it will stay stable.
Similarly, Douglas Hofstadter, in Gödel, Escher, Bach: An Eternal Golden Braid, wrote:
Quote:All the limitative theorems of metamathematics and the theory of computation suggest that once the ability to represent your own structure has reached a certain critical point, that is the kiss of death: it guarantees that you can never represent yourself totally. Gödel’s Incompleteness Theorem, Church’s Undecidability Theorem, Turing’s Halting Theorem, Tarski’s Truth Theorem — all have the flavour of some ancient fairy tale which warns you that "To seek self-knowledge is to embark on a journey which … will always be incomplete, cannot be charted on any map, will never halt, cannot be described."
