Brain, Computers and Mind: Speech and Thought in Humans, Animals and Machines. the False Statement of the Semantic Web & Artificial Intelligence (AI)

8/14/2019 Brain, Computers and Mind: Speech and Thought in Humans, Animals and Machines. the False Statement of the S

1/33

Brain, Computers and Mind: Speech andThought in Humans,Animals and Machines.

The false statement of the Semantic Web &Artificial Intelligence (AI).

Francisco Antonio Cern Garca

Physics Spanish Royal Society

[email protected]

Index

1. - Introduction 2

2.- Current status ofComputer Science. 3

3.- The Limits (Constraints) of the Tools in Science, FormalLogic and Experimentation. 5

4.- The basic Mechanisms ofLanguage and Thought. 8

5.- Structuralism, Continental Philosophy &AnalyticPhilosophy. 9

6.- Knowledge and Transmission ofKnowledge. 10

7.- Nature and Representation of Knowledge. 13

8.- Why not trying to teach how to talk and / orthink to a

1

Digitally signed by ENTIDAD IDENTITY AND

CONSULTING SL - CIF B73415119 - NOMBRE

CERON GARCIA FRANCISCO ANTONIO - NIF

27478316D

Reason: I am the author of this document

Location: Murcia - Spain

'Date: 2009.09.05 20:12:22 +02'00
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brainhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computerhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mindhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_languagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thoughthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animalhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computerhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic_Webhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_intelligencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_intelligencehttp://www.linkedin.com/in/franciscoantoniocerongarciahttp://www.linkedin.com/in/franciscoantoniocerongarciahttp://rsef.uc3m.es/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=79&Itemid=43&lang=sphttp://rsef.uc3m.es/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=79&Itemid=43&lang=spmailto:[email protected]%20%0Dhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_sciencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limitshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constrainthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toolhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sciencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formal_logic#Formal_logichttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formal_logic#Formal_logichttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Experimentationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mechanismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thoughthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Structuralismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continental_philosophyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analytic_philosophyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analytic_philosophyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knowledgehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Informationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knowledgehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knowledge_representationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_languagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thoughthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thoughthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_languagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knowledge_representationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knowledgehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Informationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knowledgehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analytic_philosophyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analytic_philosophyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continental_philosophyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Structuralismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thoughthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mechanismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Experimentationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formal_logic#Formal_logichttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formal_logic#Formal_logichttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sciencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toolhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constrainthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limitshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_sciencemailto:[email protected]%20%0Dhttp://rsef.uc3m.es/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=79&Itemid=43&lang=sphttp://www.linkedin.com/in/franciscoantoniocerongarciahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_intelligencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_intelligencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic_Webhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computerhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animalhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thoughthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_languagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mindhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computerhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brain


2/33

Machine? Limitations and failures of the approach of theDescription Logic. 15

9.- Thought and Language. 17

10.- The Thought is not the same as Language: What isIntelligence?What is Thought? 19

11.- Difference betweenAnimals and Humans, and Brainand Mind. 19

12.- Conclusion: Inability ofLanguage and humanThought

in the Machine , and the false statement of the SemanticWeb &Artificial Intelligence. 20

13.- Theorem: The limit of TheArtificial Intelligence. 22

14.- Theorem: From Logic to Ontology: The limit of TheSemantic Web. 24

15.- Bibliography 25

1 .- Introduction

In the reading of Minds, Machines and Gdel byJ .R. Lucas and other authors such as Roger Penrose, theysuggest that is impossible to think and/or talk for machinesor computers.

Metonymy, the first Mechanism of humanThought andLanguage, have been built-in Machines or computers, andit is the substrate of Symbolic Logic and/or Formal (and

therefore also of Mathematics), but we have lack of theMetaphor, which lets human beings to "Conclude" in the

2
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computerhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limitshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Description_logichttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thoughthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thoughthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thoughthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animalhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brainhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mindhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conclusionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abilityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thoughthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computerhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic_Webhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic_Webhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_intelligencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_intelligencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic_Webhttp://users.ox.ac.uk/~jrlucas/Godel/brighton.htmlhttp://users.ox.ac.uk/~jrlucas/Godel/mmg.htmlhttp://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roger_Penrose#column-onehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metonymyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mechanismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thoughthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computerhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_logichttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematicshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metaphorhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conclusionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conclusionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metaphorhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematicshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_logichttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computerhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thoughthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mechanismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metonymyhttp://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roger_Penrose#column-onehttp://users.ox.ac.uk/~jrlucas/Godel/mmg.htmlhttp://users.ox.ac.uk/~jrlucas/Godel/brighton.htmlhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic_Webhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_intelligencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_intelligencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic_Webhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic_Webhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computerhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thoughthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abilityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conclusionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mindhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brainhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animalhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thoughthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thoughthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thoughthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Description_logichttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limitshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer


3/33

strict Sense of the term in Psychoanalysis: Metaphor bringsus to Reality andTime.

And this is my challenge: Find a Logic Consistent, that

besides the Metonymy in a ConsistentMathematical Logic,and it has also the Metaphor incorporated.

2 .- Current status ofComputer Science

The attempt to build the Semantic Web from the Description

Logic, which is in turn based on Symbolic Logic andMathematical Logic, is Contradictory and Inconsistent,because although Symbolic Logic or Mathematical Logic isConsistent, by definition it has unique or Unambiguoussense (unique Meaning), which is totally Contradictory tothe Semantics of the Language (natural), which ismeaningless or Ambiguous (several Meanings).

If what you seek is, for example, as an application of theSemantic Web, do a search on Google, and to get insteadof the several Ambiguous million results, only a few andaccurate results, we have to start from otherTools moreappropriate to the Natural Language, who is ofMeaningfulAmbiguous, and therefore we must build new tools in placeof the existing ones that take into account this difference.

We should ask help to the Sciences that study theLanguage, and especially we should focus on the Sciencesthat study the HumanMind andThought, we can find thetools that we seek, and if its possible, add them onMathematics, and if its necessary, to invent a newapproach to Formal Logic, Symbolic Logic and/or currentmath, that gives rise to a new and different logic than thecurrent Description Logic (Knowledge Representation),

which is a complete failure to built a Semantic Web onInternet.

3
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sense_(disambiguation)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychoanalysishttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metaphorhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Realityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logichttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consistencyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metonymyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consistencyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_logichttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metaphorhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_sciencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_sciencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic_Webhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Description_logichttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Description_logichttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_logichttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle_of_contradictionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consistencyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_logichttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_logichttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consistencyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ambiguityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sense_(disambiguation)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meaninghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle_of_contradictionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semanticshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_languagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_languagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ambiguityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meaninghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic_Webhttp://www.google.com/http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ambiguityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toolhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_languagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meaningfulhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ambiguityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sciencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sciencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mindhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thoughthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematicshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formal_systemhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_logichttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Description_logichttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knowledge_representationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knowledge_representationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic_Webhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internethttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internethttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic_Webhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knowledge_representationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Description_logichttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_logichttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formal_systemhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematicshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thoughthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mindhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sciencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sciencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ambiguityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meaningfulhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_languagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toolhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ambiguityhttp://www.google.com/http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic_Webhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meaninghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ambiguityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_languagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semanticshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle_of_contradictionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meaninghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sense_(disambiguation)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ambiguityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consistencyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_logichttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_logichttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consistencyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle_of_contradictionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_logichttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Description_logichttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Description_logichttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic_Webhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_sciencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metaphorhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_logichttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consistencyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metonymyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consistencyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logichttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Realityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metaphorhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychoanalysishttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sense_(disambiguation)


4/33

All this makes Sense if we analyze the Framework withinHuman Knowledge has been developed, including theprehistoric times. A fundamental features of it, and also in a

very simplified form, the only thing that truly differentiates usfrom Animals is that we are "speaking beings", that is, wemake use ofLanguage, and it is very important because weuse Language as a medium ofCommunication, which hasserved for theTransmission ofKnowledge throughout theentire history of mankind.

The only thing that really changed the way of purely oral

Transmission (speech), has been the invention ofWriting,which allowed the survival and subsequent accumulation ofKnowledge, from the papyrus paper and the tables of claythrough the books manuscripts and reaching the inventionof Printing by Gutenberg. With this last discovery andcheaper cost ofTransmittingKnowledge, and subsequentlywith the invention of the Internet (and Computers), it hasdecreased the cost ofKnowledgeTransmission to almost

zero (at least in developed countries), and Knowledge forthe first time in Human history, is now available to almost allthe entire world and not for only a privileged few Humansbeings as in the Middle Ages.

But now if we could also built a Semantic Web on Internet,savings would not only be an economic question andmonetary issues, the economy would be further savings of

Time ofThinking, or what is the same, spending lessTimeto seek and find Knowledge.

Moreover, besides the history and the fundamentalcharacteristics in theTransmission ofKnowledge and hisachievement, who is HumanCivilization, we must define theFramework within it has been developed throughout thehistory ofMankind, and it is not a trivial and unimportant

issue, but this question is the most important. Today thereis Science-specific of Knowledge as the study of

4
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sense_(disambiguation)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frameworkhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knowledgehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animalhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communicationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Informationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knowledgehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Informationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Writinghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knowledgehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Printing_presshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johannes_Gutenberghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Informationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knowledgehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internethttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computerhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knowledgehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Informationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knowledgehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic_Webhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internethttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thinkinghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knowledgehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Informationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knowledgehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilizationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frameworkhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sciencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knowledgehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knowledgehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sciencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frameworkhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilizationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knowledgehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Informationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knowledgehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thinkinghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internethttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic_Webhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knowledgehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Informationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knowledgehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computerhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internethttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knowledgehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Informationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johannes_Gutenberghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Printing_presshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knowledgehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Writinghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Informationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knowledgehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Informationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communicationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animalhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knowledgehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frameworkhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sense_(disambiguation)


5/33

Epistemology and others ... But we still need more tools inother areas, such as Psychoanalysis, Linguistics, etc.

3 .- The Limits of the Tools in Science, Formal Logicand Experimentation.

First I want to say that "Cognitive Neuroscience", whereeverything related to Humans beings has a directexplanation from "Neuroscience" and/or "Biology" and/or"Genetics", is very Incomplete and Partial. The fundamentalworking hypothesis of all modern Science is that Mind and

Brain are the same or equivalent, this is given due to theexclusivity and dominance in the Science ofStatistical andStochastic methods, Quantitative Research and FormalLogic, ignoring and excluding Qualitative Researchmethods. Although they are rigorous, they are Incompleteand/or Contradictory too, as we could realize from manyresults and paradoxes in Mathematics (Gdels theorems),and in other areas of Science. But Human beings with

Language goes far beyond this "scientific" Reductionism(see the Science as an exclusively Formal System of

Thought as well defined by orthodox and traditional way),Human beings goes far beyond any BiologicalNature, asevidenced Psychoanalysis, particularly Freud and Lacan.

Freud and Lacan have discovered that there exists aunique and singular Person in every Human being who is

unattainable, for instance, his /her Unconscious, and his/herUnconscious is not generalizable, in the sense ofreductionists Sciences, like Genetics, Biology, Chemistry,Mathematics, and Physics. It is still more widely from theviewpoint ofFormal Logic, because this system ofThoughtis by definition closed and Complete by itself, but it is only aMetonymic approaching ofReality, devoid ofMetaphor ofHuman Language and Thought. It is a very poor

approximation to Reality, despite theTechnological benefitsthat our Civilization has achieved from it, and it led us to its

5
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epistemologyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychoanalysishttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linguisticshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limitshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toolhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sciencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formal_logic#Formal_logichttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Experimentationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_neurosciencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neurosciencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biologyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geneticshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Completenesshttp://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/partialhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sciencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mindhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brainhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sciencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statisticshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stochastichttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantitative_researchhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formal_systemhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formal_systemhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qualitative_researchhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Completenesshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle_of_contradictionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematicshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6del%27s_incompleteness_theoremshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sciencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductionismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sciencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formal_systemhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thoughthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biologyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_naturehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychoanalysishttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sigmund_Freudhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacques_Lacanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sigmund_Freudhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacques_Lacanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unconscious_mindhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unconscious_mindhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductionismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sciencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geneticshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biologyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemistryhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematicshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physicshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formal_systemhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thoughthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Completenesshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metonymyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Realityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metaphorhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thoughthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Realityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technologyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilizationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilizationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technologyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Realityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thoughthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metaphorhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Realityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metonymyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Completenesshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thoughthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formal_systemhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physicshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematicshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemistryhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biologyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geneticshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sciencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductionismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unconscious_mindhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unconscious_mindhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacques_Lacanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sigmund_Freudhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacques_Lacanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sigmund_Freudhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychoanalysishttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_naturehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biologyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thoughthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formal_systemhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sciencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductionismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sciencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6del%27s_incompleteness_theoremshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematicshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle_of_contradictionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Completenesshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qualitative_researchhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formal_systemhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formal_systemhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantitative_researchhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stochastichttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statisticshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sciencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brainhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mindhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sciencehttp://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/partialhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Completenesshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geneticshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biologyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neurosciencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_neurosciencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Experimentationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formal_logic#Formal_logichttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sciencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toolhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limitshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linguisticshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychoanalysishttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epistemology


6/33

own Limitations (Constraints) in the Knowledge ofReality,which is clearly visible in many Paradoxes: Mathematics(Gdel Incompleteness Theorems), Computer Science(Turing machine and Halting Problem), and even Physical

Science (The Theory of Relativity is incompatible with thephysical and mathematical theory ofQuantum Mechanics -our two fundamental theories ofScience andTechnologycloser to Reality).

In humanity history, the Sciences, Physics, Chemistry,Mathematics and other Sciences such as Biology, Genetics,

Neuroscience, Medicine, etc.., and all its applicationsacross theTechnology past and present, all of them arebased on a Formal Logic ofThinking, and precisely fromGdel, we found numerous examples of Paradoxes ... Allthis shows that we are at the Limits of the Knowledge. Wecan provide Formal Logic, which by definition is limited onlyto the Unambiguous Metonymy, and it has enabled theconstruction of the currentTechnologicalCivilization, but we

are in a Logical Framework with Constrains of FormalLogic, and as I said it is theTool ofScientificThought and

Technology by its definition, and throughout its history sincethe days of Greek civilization.

Then ifFormal Logic, which is the foundation of allThoughtof all the Science andTechnology, can be "Contradictory"and "Limited" or "Incomplete" (Gdel), you have to go a

step further and open the horizon using tools morecomplete and less biased, we can take advantage of whatPsychoanalysis has discovered about Human beings andits constitution of psychic structure inThree Orders: TheSymbolic Order,The Imaginary Order (and lastThe Real)and the combination of both enables us to appreciate"something" ofReality, but in a Partial and fragmented way,there is no Consistency and reciprocity between what our

Mind is capable of reaching to grasp or understand ofReality, with what is truly real (Real World).

6
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limithttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constrainthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knowledgehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Realityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradoxhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematicshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6del%27s_incompleteness_theoremshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_sciencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turing_machinehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halting_problemhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physicshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sciencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_relativityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_mechanicshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sciencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technologyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Realityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sciencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physicshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemistryhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematicshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sciencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biologyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geneticshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neurosciencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medicinehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technologyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formal_systemhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thoughthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6del%27s_incompleteness_theoremshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradoxhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limitshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knowledgehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formal_systemhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ambiguityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metonymyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technologyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilizationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formal_systemhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limitshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formal_systemhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formal_systemhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toolhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sciencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thoughthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technologyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formal_systemhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thoughthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sciencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technologyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle_of_contradictionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limitshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Completenesshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6del%27s_incompleteness_theoremshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychoanalysishttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacques_Lacanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Symbolichttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Symbolichttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Imaginary_(psychoanalysis)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Realhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Realityhttp://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/partialhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consistencyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mindhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Realityhttp://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/real_worldhttp://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/real_worldhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Realityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mindhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consistencyhttp://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/partialhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Realityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Realhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Imaginary_(psychoanalysis)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Symbolichttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Symbolichttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacques_Lacanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychoanalysishttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6del%27s_incompleteness_theoremshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Completenesshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limitshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle_of_contradictionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technologyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sciencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thoughthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formal_systemhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technologyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thoughthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sciencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toolhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formal_systemhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formal_systemhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limitshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formal_systemhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilizationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technologyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metonymyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ambiguityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formal_systemhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knowledgehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limitshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradoxhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6del%27s_incompleteness_theoremshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thoughthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formal_systemhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technologyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medicinehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neurosciencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geneticshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biologyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sciencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematicshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemistryhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physicshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sciencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Realityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technologyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sciencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_mechanicshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_relativityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sciencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physicshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halting_problemhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turing_machinehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_sciencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6del%27s_incompleteness_theoremshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematicshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradoxhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Realityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knowledgehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constrainthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limit


7/33

And for this failure, and because we have not realized thatthe Discourse ofScience andTechnology is Alienating, webegin to find the Science riddled with Paradoxes and

Contradictions, and to make matters worse, as Metaphoris excluded of the Scientific discourse it becomes moreMetonymic and Closed, the more away from Reality, and aliving example for all people and very close to them, is theeconomic current world "crisis", where the wholeeconomic system has devoured itself, nor do the wholeHumanity with the Alienation of a nuclear war (we were notfar away from that), nor do we devour ourselves. All of this

is going on without any Constraint to Science andTechnology to get the "Future" and "Progress", if we are notaware of their Limits and Constraints, and we are notresponsible for them, Reality is always present to remind itnot so very nice to us. I do not propose a return to Nature,which is "Mythical", but we should take care of ourresponsibility and take the Limits ofScientificThought and

Technology, but as I am a scientist I attempt to go one step

further there, and bearing in mind these limitations and myown limitations to know the Reality, I am trying to find newways ofThinking applicable to Science, Technology andComputers.

The worst mistake of the Science is believing that Scienceis the unique fundamental truth and is above all, but Realityis so complex and so complicated that requires at least a

large amount of humility, this is why the Science is sounable to go beyond their own Rhetoric and its own LogicalLimits, and Science should realize that Mind and Brainare not equivalent and/or equal, this is the big mistake ofthe majority of current scientific people (Scientism). But atleast if you do not want to accept it as aTrue and proven,we could always use it as Axiomatic Principle, likethousands ofKnowledge in all areas ofScience that are not

Demonstrable but are taken for Certain, and if my axiomthat Mind and Brain are not the same, and it works correctly

7
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discoursehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sciencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technologyhttp://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/alienatehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sciencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradoxhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle_of_contradictionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metaphorhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sciencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metonymyhttp://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/closedhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Realityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanityhttp://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/alienatehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constrainthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sciencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technologyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Futurehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_progresshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limitshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constrainthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Realityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mythicalhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limitshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sciencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thoughthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technologyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Realityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thoughthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sciencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technologyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computershttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sciencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sciencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Realityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sciencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discoursehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formal_systemhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limitshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sciencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mindhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brainhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logical_valuehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axiom_(disambiguation)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principlehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knowledgehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sciencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axiomhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Certaintyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axiomhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mindhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brainhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brainhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mindhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axiomhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Certaintyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axiomhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sciencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knowledgehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principlehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axiom_(disambiguation)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logical_valuehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brainhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mindhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sciencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limitshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formal_systemhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discoursehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sciencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Realityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sciencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sciencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computershttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technologyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sciencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thoughthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Realityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technologyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thoughthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sciencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limitshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mythicalhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Realityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constrainthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limitshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_progresshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Futurehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technologyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sciencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constrainthttp://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/alienatehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Realityhttp://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/closedhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metonymyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sciencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metaphorhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle_of_contradictionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradoxhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sciencehttp://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/alienatehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technologyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sciencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discourse


8/33

and leads to ConsistentResults with the Real World, thenwe would think that it isTrue.

4 .- The basic Mechanisms ofLanguage and Thought.

In addition to what said above, Psychoanalysis also teachesus that there are two basic mechanisms in the Language(Saussure) and the Human Thought, which aredisplacement or Metonymy, and condensation or Metaphor(Freud), or linguistically called Metonymy and Metaphor.

Metonymy is the fundamental mechanism of ScientificThought (and math), and it reflects the Formal Logic and/orsymbolic, where the Meaning ofAmbiguousLanguage hasbeen dissected in a precise and UnambiguousMeaning toget Rigor and Consistency, therefore exclude theContradiction, but at the cost of removing the othermechanism ofThought, which is the condensation orMetaphor, paradoxically coming to Contradictory (see

Paradoxes ...) or Incomplete results. The Formal Logicalsystem has operated up and allows us to develop our

TechnologicalCivilization, but as I said, we are finding itsLogicalLimits.

Now we can take a step further and beyond, incorporatingthe Metaphor of our Logical System ofThought in ScienceandTechnology, where the incorporation of the Metaphor,

could mean the loss of the principle of generality, butalthough it would still be incomplete, you have a closer andmore accurate representation of reality than with the

Traditional System. This is what I intend to do and try tobuild from now on...

And if you define logic of Metonymy that has alsoincorporated the Metaphor, then I will have incorporated the

two basic Mechanisms ofHumanThought and Language. Itwill still be a partial and limited Knowledge, but as I have

8
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consistenthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logical_consequencehttp://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/real_worldhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truthhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mechanismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thoughthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychoanalysishttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferdinand_de_Saussurehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thoughthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metonymyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metaphorhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freudhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metonymyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metaphorhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metonymyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sciencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thoughthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formal_systemhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meaninghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ambiguityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ambiguityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meaninghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rigorhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consistencyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle_of_contradictionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thoughthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metaphorhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle_of_contradictionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradoxhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Completenesshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formal_systemhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technologyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilizationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formal_systemhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limitshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metaphorhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formal_systemhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thoughthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sciencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technologyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metaphorhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formal_systemhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metonymyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metaphorhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mechanismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thoughthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knowledgehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knowledgehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thoughthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mechanismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metaphorhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metonymyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formal_systemhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metaphorhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technologyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sciencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thoughthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formal_systemhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metaphorhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limitshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formal_systemhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilizationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technologyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formal_systemhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Completenesshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradoxhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle_of_contradictionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metaphorhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thoughthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle_of_contradictionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consistencyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rigorhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meaninghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ambiguityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ambiguityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meaninghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formal_systemhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thoughthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sciencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metonymyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metaphorhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metonymyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freudhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metaphorhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metonymyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thoughthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferdinand_de_Saussurehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychoanalysishttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thoughthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mechanismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truthhttp://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/real_worldhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logical_consequencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consistent


9/33

said before, with a better perception of Reality that themere Metonymy ofSymbolic Logic.

The Metaphor/ condensation is what allows us to Conclude,

and it introduces us to Reality andTime, whereas insymbolic or Mathematical Logic, Reality comes only throughthe Cardinality ofNumbers.

5 .- Structuralism, Continental Philosophy & AnalyticPhilosophy.

The experimental and theoretical framework in which Iresearch is therefore the "Structuralism", movement, who isincluded in Continental Philosophy and opposite to AnalyticPhilosophy, starting from Saussure to the study oflanguage, according to J akobson and Levi Strauss, andending with Freud and Lacan and the discovery of theUnconscious, the Psychoanalysis and the creation of manas a singular person.

I do not propose to make a perfect demonstration, completeand rigorous in the classical and orthodox sense of science,if we take the concept of formal logic and the thinking oforthodox science and technology, this does not mean givingup the coherence or internal consistency, but my system isnot complete by definition, and therefore not closed, I onlyrequire for it, if I can do that, the non-contradiction

principle, and it is from the experimental and theoreticalframework that I have defined, to look for, identify, and/orinvent if it is necessary, the tools that allow me to analyzeand examine the knowledge not only of a metonymic formof formal logic and/or symbolic, as has happened so far inComputing and Internet, but also I can built a semanticWeb, with the addition of a tool that represents themetaphor, and the principle of condensation of language

and human thought, which is what brings us closer to realitythrough the passage of time and the conclusion.

9
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Realityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metonymyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_logichttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metaphorhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conclusionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Realityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_logichttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Realityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cardinalityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Numbershttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Structuralismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continental_philosophyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analytic_philosophyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analytic_philosophyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Structuralismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continental_philosophyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analytic_philosophyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analytic_philosophyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferdinand_de_Saussurehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Jakobsonhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Levi_Strausshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sigmund_Freudhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacques_Lacanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unconscious_mindhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychoanalysishttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychoanalysishttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unconscious_mindhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacques_Lacanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sigmund_Freudhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Levi_Strausshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Jakobsonhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferdinand_de_Saussurehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analytic_philosophyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analytic_philosophyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continental_philosophyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Structuralismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analytic_philosophyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analytic_philosophyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continental_philosophyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Structuralismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Numbershttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cardinalityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Realityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_logichttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Realityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conclusionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metaphorhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_logichttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metonymyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reality


10/33

This logical system as I have explained on our perception ofreality, by definition will not be complete, and would beconsistent, but it will be a useful tool to manage knowledge

online. I do not intend that computers could speak, becausemy theorem "The limit of The Semantic Web", says that thisis impossible, but all that you can research in that waywould be a breakthrough for the handling and transmissionof knowledge via the Internet.

This logical system means that it is not closed, so it is open,although it seems impossible to build something "scientific"

in this way, but all science and technology and their findingsare largely embedded in this framework, because althoughwe tried to formalize science and technology with formallogic, the relationship of science and technology with thereality goes through our mind and its mechanismssometimes inconsistent, but directly related to the real thing,where nobody is, from there is that I intend to seek and findthis new order of thought, where everything is not

completely closed and completed, but if you were there,everything is connected to reality through the languagecomputer and the Internet.

This is my project, and it is perhaps nonsensical great andimpossible, but as Lacan said "the impossible is the onlyreality", and so I am researching on it!

6.- Knowledge and Transmission ofKnowledge.

Knowledge is, first, the state which knows or knowssomething, and secondly, the content known or known aspart of the cultural heritage of mankind. By extension, alsooften called "knowledge" of everything an individual or asociety deemed given or known acquaintance.

There is no doubt, science is one of the main types ofknowledge. The sciences are the result of efforts and

10
http://www.box.net/shared/mnln1hjql1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knowledgehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Informationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knowledgehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knowledgehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Informationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knowledgehttp://www.box.net/shared/mnln1hjql1


11/33

research methods in search for answers to specificproblems, and the elucidation of which seeks to provide anadequate representation of the world. There are, however,many types of knowledge, not being scientists, they are

perfectly suited to its purpose: the know-how in the crafts,learn to swim, etc.. And knowing the language, thetraditions, legends, customs and ideas of a particularculture, the knowledge that individuals have their ownhistory (they know their name, they know their parents andtheir past), or even the common knowledge to a givensociety, including the humanity (to know what is a hammer,knowing that water extinguishes fire).

Even when information is generated each time, however,the amount of human knowledge is necessarily finite, aswell as the difficulty of solving such problems as the originof life and the universe, death, among many others.

The knowledge acquired through a variety of cognitiveprocesses: perception, memory, experience (attempts

followed by success or failure), reasoning, learning andteaching, testimony of third parties ... Controlledobservation, experimentation, modelling, criticism ofsources (in history), surveys, and other procedures that arespecifically employed by the sciences, can be viewed as arefinement or an implementation of the above. These arethe subject of study of epistemology.

The importance attached to knowledge distinguisheshumanity from other animal species. All human societiesacquire, preserve and transmit a substantial amount ofknowledge, mainly, through language. With the rise ofcivilizations, the accumulation and dissemination ofknowledge are multiplied by the writing. Throughout history,mankind has developed a variety of techniques to preserve,transmit and develop knowledge, such as school,

encyclopaedias, newspapers, and computers.

11


12/33

This importance goes hand in hand with a questioning ofthe value of knowledge. Many societies and religiousmovements, political philosophers have considered theaccretion of knowledge, or its dissemination, is not

appropriate and should be limited. Conversely, other groupsand societies have created institutions to ensure theirpreservation, development and dissemination. Also, debateabout the respective values of different domains and typesof knowledge.

In contemporary societies, the diffusion of knowledge, orthe contrary, retention of knowledge, has an important

political and economic role, including military, so does thespread of pseudo-knowledge (or disinformation).Knowledge contributes as a power source. This roleexplains much of the dissemination of propaganda andpseudo-science, which attempts to present as knowledge,things that are not. This gives a particular importance to thesources of knowledge assumptions, such as mass mediaand their tools, such as the Internet.

And just as the invention of writing and printing broughtabout a revolution and the explosion of knowledge, now theinvention of the Internet and the attempt to build a SemanticWeb on it, would mean a revolution and the exponentialexplosion in the transmission of knowledge, on a scalewithout precedent for the entire history of civilization, notonly because all knowledge would be accessible to a very

small cost as the Internet has given rise, but also the cost ofsearch time of the knowledge, through the filter of theSemantic Web on the Internet, would be reduced to almostzero.

To achieve the goal of building the Semantic Web, we needto "teach" the language to computers, and we need toknow:

What is the nature of knowledge?

12


13/33

How to represent knowledge?

And these questions and their answers are not frivolous,

because we must be aware that this is the crucial step thatrepresents the Semantic Web: The incorporation of the"Language" in computers! And although my theorem "Thelimit of The Semantic Web" said that this is an impossiblegoal, everything that we discover researching in this way,would give us new tools for knowledge transfer. Obviously,if we were able to reach this goal wed be very close toimplant a human thought into machines but although

having such skill theyd never be equivalent to humanbeings because of their different connections to the realworld. If it would be very close to machines that have"human thought" that even though taking such a skill? theywould never be the same or equivalent to human beings bytheir distinct relations with reality.

7 .- Nature and Representation of Knowledge.

The classical theory of transmitting knowledge(Communication Theory), which is communication theory,tells us that there is a transmitter (sender) and a receiver,which is what also uses psychology as a science, but thenovelty of the discovery of psychoanalysis, is that inaddition to the aforementioned receiver there is a secondreceiver that is also the same issuer (sender). And

Psychoanalysis reveals the human being as a subject split,and thus reveals the ambivalence of language and theabsence of an unequivocal sense of it, that is, without asense of the meaning of language, as Wittgenstein said.

Psychoanalysis tells us that the constitution of the humanbeing involved a symbolic world, which is the language (

The Symbolic Order ), an imaginary world (The Imaginary

Order ), which is the share that each has in the language,and the existence in The Real world, which is only

13
http://www.box.net/shared/mnln1hjql1http://www.box.net/shared/mnln1hjql1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knowledge_representationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communication_theoryhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wittgensteinhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Symbolichttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Imaginary_(psychoanalysis)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Imaginary_(psychoanalysis)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Realhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Realhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Imaginary_(psychoanalysis)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Imaginary_(psychoanalysis)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Symbolichttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wittgensteinhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communication_theoryhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knowledge_representationhttp://www.box.net/shared/mnln1hjql1http://www.box.net/shared/mnln1hjql1


14/33

accessible through the representation of it that gives us thecombination of symbolic and the imaginary.

Regardless of all the complex details in psychoanalytic

theory, you should take a look at this subject on Freud andLacan, the important thing is that humans do not perceivethe real world or reality as it is, but they perceive it underthe prism of their own original constitution as human being.

Thus the apprehension of knowledge is not unlimited, but itis limited to the ambivalent nature of human language,which sets the limits of knowledge of reality, and a goodexample of it is the unsuccessful attempt of the great

mathematician Hilbert and others, to construct amathematical system axiomatically complete and notcontradictory in itself, but as Gdel proved with histheorems, if a system of knowledge is complete, then itis contradictory, and the opposite, if a system isincomplete then it is not contradictory, we also haveother many examples as the Turing machine and thehalting problem or stop of calculation. Eventually what all

this tells us, is that language is dragging us to their ownlimits, and if we do not have this in mind to build theSemantic Web, we are doomed to failure from the outset.

Then the nature of knowledge is limited both, by thelanguage as a transmitter of knowledge, and thePsychoanalytic structure of humans beings. And whatrepresents knowledge among humans, it is not the thought,

but it is the transmitter, or language. So the important thingis not so much the nature of knowledge, it is the nature oflanguage and the means to transfer the language, andnatural language is ambivalent and ambiguous, and this iswhat we have to take into account building Semantic Web.

One more point, the myths that we often disregard as beingoutdated and not modern, precisely the myths tell us what

are the limits of our perception of reality, the limits of ourthinking, and they all have in common besides the use of

14
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hilberthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6delhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turing_machinehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halting_problemhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halting_problemhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turing_machinehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6delhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hilbert


15/33

metaphor, which we mark the passage of reality as timegoes on, the conclusion, and is because of that, humanbeings dont have the problem of stopping as in the Turingmachine. Going further and more abundant, both Hegel and

Kant considered time not categorized, and this is the samething for Psychoanalysis, time is an illusion of ourperception, and time is a way of representing reality as acourse of events. And the Description Logic, which is thebasis now used to build the Semantic Web, cannot giveaccount of language, because you start building DescriptionLogic (it has been built from Knowledge Representationwho has been built from Formal Logic) missing the

metaphor, since it is a symbolic logic, and the axiomaticsystem is complete, and lacking the metaphor, and ofcourse as well as Gdel has shown us, ultimately leads to acontradiction, which is what happens all the time whentrying to build the Semantic Web from this base: They havebeen a complete failure despite the multimillion-dollarinvestment! The basis for transferring knowledge, as I saidearlier is natural language, and language has two

fundamental structures:

Metonymy and metaphor.

With the metonymy we already have built the mathematicallanguage, everything in it is a metonymic process, and iftime take part of it, it is only a fiction, f(t) or time-dependent,but there is no use of metaphor, which could realize us of

the senseless of the metonymy, metaphor would take us toreality and lead to solve the problem of finding the stop ofthe Turing machine.

Then we have to introduce the metaphor in the foundationsof mathematics, which would allow us to build a logicallyconsistent, but with no means contradictory, similar to thelogic of human unconscious as understood by

Psychoanalysis. If you achieve that goal, we would have the

15
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hegelhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kanthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Description_logichttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Description_logichttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Description_logichttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knowledge_representationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formal_logic#Formal_logichttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formal_logic#Formal_logichttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knowledge_representationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Description_logichttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Description_logichttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Description_logichttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kanthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hegel


16/33

right tools to implement the Semantic Web on computers,and operate.

And this is my challenge: Find that logic consistent has

metonymy in mathematical logic consistent, and has alsoincorporated the metaphor.

8.- Why not trying to teach how to talk and / orthink toa Machine? Limitations and failures of the approach ofthe Description Logic.

When I was studying science, throughout my university'syears, a very experienced teacher of physics andmathematics, gave to me the following two advices:

The first advise, when one is faced with a problem to solve,the problem does not ask you how much know about it, toaccommodate itself to your knowledge and be able toresolve it, this seems a truism and the truth of pure common

sense, but in this case is truest than ever.

The second advise was that "usually" all problems have asolution that is "implicit" if the question of the problem iswell posed, in other words if the reference frame of theproblem is well built.

Both these comments made me totally change my point of

view and I started to address the problem of building the"Semantic Web", instead of putting my efforts directly intheir resolution, with the deep and dense training onMathematics and Physics that I acquired in my training as ascientist, and I realize that it has been the usual attitude ofall those who have worked so far in this field trying to solvethis problem, and so far with little success, I preferred toleave the particular and specific problem, and take a more

comprehensive and broad in the same (which means leavethe forest to see a whole and not a single tree), and

16
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_languagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thoughthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computerhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limitshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Description_logichttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Description_logichttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limitshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computerhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thoughthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_language


17/33

therefore as I said, instead of attempt directly and rapidlyhis solution, I am taking a long detour, and not absurd ormeaningless, according to the two "recommendations"above, and I am building a framework to provide a place to

build the Semantic Web.

To do this I started looking for where to build the "SemanticWeb" in computing, and now it is a part of the logicdescription, which in turn is based on Symbolic Logic andMathematical Logic.

As I know the limitations of symbolic or formal logic,

reflected in the theorems of Gdel and many paradoxes inmathematics and physics, I have expanded my field ofknowledge from Fundamental Science to Humanities(Social Sciences), and if so then it is to teach to talk to acomputer (or what is equivalent teach a computer tounderstand what we say), we are asking for the language,and therefore I joined the language in the framework of theproblem.

It could have gone to philosophy, but the problem that Ifound is that their development uses formal logic as aunique system of thought (as in pure mathematics).

9.- Thought and Language.

The need to answer the question what is intelligence? And

what is thought? Both answer are necessary to try to teacha machine, and the answers of this questions could befound on Psychoanalysis combined with linguistics, not onpsychology or biology or genetics, as they used only anapproximation to reality which is quantitative, statistical, andformal logic, and although the method is very orthodox onscience, formal logic has serious limitations, because if ourhypotheses are complete then the system is in

contradiction, and if our assumptions are incomplete thenthe system is consistent. The orthodox approach of science

17
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanitieshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_scienceshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thoughthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thoughthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_scienceshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanities


18/33

has serious limitations, in addition to the above, by requiringexperimental verification, since not everything that exists oris part of reality is experimentally verifiable, in a quantitativeand statistical way, and if we do not accept this limitation to

access absolutely to reality, at least it should be taken as aworking hypothesis, because what I am saying is that ourapproach of the orthodox scientific method is incompleteand does not allow us to solve the problem that we aredealing with.

And more, Quantum Mechanics on Physical Science, saysus that if we make any experiment, we are changing the

isolated conditions of it when we show it, and then wechange the results of it by our interaction with it. All of thismeans that if we want to assure all the scientific knowledgeon experimentation, we change the results of our own realexperiments; then it is a illusion and a big mistake to built aperfect formal logical system on Science which onlyreference are the experiments, and a example of it is theparadox ofSchrdinger's Cat.

According to psychoanalysis, the human being is a realitythat goes beyond the merely biological, because humanbeings are not regulated exclusively by its own instincts (asanimals in the field of biology). According to Psychoanalysishumans beings are regulated by their relationship with theGoce : J ouissance-Enjoyment (drives: Libido/Eros &

Thanatos) in the technical sense of that term in

Psychoanalysis and they are not regulated by the Instincts;from the Freuds age English people has translated theGermanTrieb as Instincts, and it is a great mistake! And itis one of the main reasons because for English scientistsBrain is the same as Mind. The importance of this term"unknown" for the rest of science is that it is accurate andmarks the exact difference between humans and all otherliving beings. This difference is that we are "speaking

beings", and this has enabled us to build our civilization,culture and technology. Therefore, as far as possible we

18
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schr%C3%B6dinger%27s_cathttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jouissancehttp://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/enjoyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libidohttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eros_(Freud)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thanatos_(psychoanalysis)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instincthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_drivehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instincthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instincthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_drivehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instincthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thanatos_(psychoanalysis)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eros_(Freud)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libidohttp://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/enjoyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jouissancehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schr%C3%B6dinger%27s_cat


19/33

could make a machine to reach thought or talk, it will neverbe equivalent to a human being, because their relation withreality is different: the human being feels (and thinks) for theGoce and the machine could think or speak but could not

feel because it has no relation to the "lack" and Goce. Andthe sense of the term feel, I mean it technically inPsychoanalysis, the lack of not being complete, the painbeing experienced by every human being or for eachindividual, and not generalizable in the experimental,sense, statistical and quantitative science, but if I cannotprove it scientifically, it does not mean that it does not exist,and this particular and specific link with the human

existence, modify profoundly its relationship with reality, sothat is not reproducible, and not outside of eachexperimental human being, and also we cannot build amachine with this faculties. This is because I say that evenif we could talk to a machine, and by extension it has adimension of our thinking, it would never be complete in thesense of the lack experience, the real experience of everyhuman being. The only hard evidence in this regard can be

drawn from the clinic and/or psychopathology ofpsychoanalysis, and try to get to understand some of it isnecessary to be a scholar of psychoanalysis, but we cantake it at least as a hypothesis and or a working premise: Ifall the assumptions are set up correctly, I should be able tofind the solution to our problem.

10.- The Thought is not the same as Language: What isIntelligence? What is Thought?

Now I am trying to answer the question: What isintelligence? To define what is Intelligence, fromPsychoanalysis, and as I understand it, Intelligence is theconjunction of the three orders of the psychic structure of

Human beings:

19
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thoughthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thoughthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thoughthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thought


20/33

First, The Symbolic Order (the language), Second, TheImaginary Order (it is the partial access to the language ofeach human being), Third, the existence of the person inthe reality (The Real), all this terms contained in the strict

technical sense of psychoanalysis. Because of this wecould realize that language is not the same as thought, butthought and intelligence are the same or equivalents, andnow I am trying to answer the question: What is thought?And again Though is the conjunction of the three orders ofthe psychic structure ofHuman beings: First,The SymbolicOrder (the language), Second,The Imaginary Order (it isthe partial access to the language of each human being),

Third, the existence of the person in the reality (The Real).

Then I do not need to reach deeper into the thought andintelligence, I can not build a machine that would feel the"failure" and/or pain of the existence like human beings (itis what creates metaphor), so I could only take thelanguage, and it will bring a dimension of thought, notexactly like that of humans, but at least more powerful than

mere formal logic, and then the two mechanisms to built ourmachine are metonymy and metaphor, I understand thatthese are the two basic mechanisms of human language(and thought & intelligence).

11.- Difference between Animals and Humans, andBrain and Mind.

One more comment about the nature of thought and therest of living beings or animals: animals have access only tothe imagination (the Mirror Stage), which is not thelanguage (the symbolic order), and animals can not accessto language, I mean, that language is not only the ability tospeak and/or transmitting knowledge, the symboliclanguage is the ability to grasp the reality (the real world),

and because of this they are not related to the Goce, andtheir behaviours are governed only by the "Instincts", which

20
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Symbolichttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Imaginary_(psychoanalysis)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Imaginary_(psychoanalysis)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Realhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Symbolichttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Symbolichttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Imaginary_(psychoanalysis)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Realhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animalhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brainhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mindhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mirror_stagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instinctshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instinctshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mirror_stagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mindhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brainhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animalhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Realhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Imaginary_(psychoanalysis)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Symbolichttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Symbolichttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Realhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Imaginary_(psychoanalysis)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Imaginary_(psychoanalysis)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Symbolic


21/33

are biological and genetic mechanisms, and inheritedbehaviour for survival, and are feasible for experiments,with quantitative and statistics measures, while access tolanguage (the symbolic order) of humans beings, makes on

them a transformation from their purely biological nature ofthe brain, and it creates the "mind", which is related to theGoce and "lack". I say more times in accurate way forbeing well understood: if there is no access to the languagethere is no access to the Goce and "lack", and neitherthought and intelligence, but I wonder: could there be somekind of access to language without access to the Goce?,and the answer that we have from computers is that they

have partly access to language, through symbolic logic, buthave no access to pain or the Goce as humans beings.

Thus incorporating the other mechanism of language,metaphor, to a machine is very complicated, because wewould build a logical structure with metaphor, then if I cannot add Goce and lack into a machine, I can notincorporate the metaphor, and therefore a machine can nottalk, can not think, and can not have intelligence.

12.- Conclusion: Inability of Language and humanThought in the Machine , and the false statement of theSemantic Web &Artificial Intelligence.

After all this, my program is unsuccessful and it is not

possible to teach the language to a machine, because itlacks any relationship with the Goce and then is notpossible to introduce another mechanism of language andthought, the metaphor. The latter arises from the processesof elaboration of the unconscious and is the conclusion ofthem. We can not build machines with access to theGoce, so it is impossible to give them intelligence as dohumans. And with regard to animals, but would have to say

that all animals have access to the "lack" of existence, butthey are unable to symbolize it, they lack the mechanisms

21
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conclusionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abilityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thoughthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computerhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic_Webhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_intelligencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_intelligencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic_Webhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computerhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thoughthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abilityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conclusion


22/33

of human thought, which are metaphor and metonymy, andthey can not construct a language, which would allows themto build a symbolic system that could create culture,civilization and technology, which is the case in humans.

The animals are only in the stage mirror, and they are onlya biological body, because there is no separation of thebiological body as in the case of human beings (because ofthe symbolic order humans beings could do that), then theanimals do have "brains" but not have "mind".

The claim that a central property of human beings,Intelligence the Sapience ofHomo sapiens can be so

precisely described that it can be simulated by amachine is a false statement!

The claim that a central property of humanbeings, Language can be so precisely described that itcan be simulated by a machine with the SemanticWeb is a false statement!

The final question for me comes across this preparation andit is:Why do human beings (we are animals too) have been ableto speak to build a symbolic world apprehends reality in asymbolic order and yet the rest of living beings (animals)have not been able to do this?Or in another way:Why, if both animals and humans are associated with a real

biological difference (albeit with very small differences ingenetic differences between all species living) the humanbeing has agreed to the relationship with the Goce (whichhas allowed him to speak) while the animals are left in thestadium or imaginary mirror and have no connection withthe Goce? And I'm almost absolutely sure that theanswers to them do not come from biology, genetics, or anyother neuroscience...

22
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sapiencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homo_sapienshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic_Webhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic_Webhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic_Webhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic_Webhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homo_sapienshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sapiencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligence


23/33


24/33

thinking into machines, they lack the metaphorical speech,because only a mathematical construction, which willalways be tautological and metonymic, and lacks the use ofmetaphor that is what leads to the conclusion or stop.

14.- Theorem: From Logic to Ontology: The limit ofThe Semantic Web .

The limit of the Semantic Web is not set by the use ofmachines themselves, and biological systems could be

used to reach this goal, but as the Logic that is being usedto construct it does not contemplate the concept of time,since it is purely formal logic and metonymic lacks themetaphor, and this is what Gdels theorems remark, thefinal tautology of each construction or metonymicMathematical Language , which leads to inconsistencies.

The construction of the Semantic Web is an UndecidibleProblem.

This consistent logic is completely opposite to the logic thatmakes inconsistent use of time, inherent in humanunconscious, but the use of time is built on the lack, not onpositive things, it is based on denials and absences, andthis is impossible to reflect on a machine because of theperceived lack of the required self-awareness is acquiredwith the absence.

The problem is we are trying to build an intelligent system toreplace our way of thinking, at least in the informationsearch, but the special nature of human mind is the use oftime which lets human beings reach a conclusion, thereforedoes not exist in the human mind the Halting Problem orstop of calculation.

So all efforts faced toward semantic web are doomed tofailure a priori if the aim is to extend our human way of

24
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic_Webhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic_Webhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logichttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6del%27s_incompleteness_theoremshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_logichttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Undecidable_problemhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Undecidable_problemhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacques_Lacanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacques_Lacanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halting_problemhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halting_problemhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacques_Lacanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacques_Lacanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Undecidable_problemhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Undecidable_problemhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_logichttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6del%27s_incompleteness_theoremshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logichttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic_Webhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic_Web


25/33

thinking into machines, they lack the metaphorical speech,because only a mathematical construction, which willalways be tautological and metonymic, and lacks the use ofthe time that is what leads to the conclusion or stop.

As a demonstration of that, if you suppose it is possible toconstruct the semantic web, as a language with capabilitiessimilar to human language, which has the use of time,should we face it as a theorem, we can prove it to be falsewith a Counter Example, and it is given in the particularcase of theTuring machine and the halting problem.

15.- Bibliography and Index of Useful Concepts

If you take a look at the Ninety-two posts below down,or in Last Post Index & View of Meta Internet Blog (you can

look for each of them in the search of the blog or inWikipedia -and if you speak Spanish language you shouldchange from English to Spanish language-), then you couldrealize that you understand all of the entire frame and thebackground that is needed to.

Computability theory (computer science)

Computer science

Computational complexity theory

Semantic Webs Terms & Companies & People

& Organizations

25
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Counterexamplehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turing_machinehttp://methainternet.wordpress.com/http://methainternet.wordpress.com/2009/06/19/computability-theory-computer-science/http://methainternet.wordpress.com/2009/06/19/computer-science/http://methainternet.wordpress.com/2009/06/19/computational-complexity-theory/http://methainternet.wordpress.com/2009/06/19/semantic-web%E2%80%99s-terms-companies-people-organizations/http://methainternet.wordpress.com/2009/06/19/semantic-web%E2%80%99s-terms-companies-people-organizations/http://methainternet.wordpress.com/2009/06/19/semantic-web%E2%80%99s-terms-companies-people-organizations/http://methainternet.wordpress.com/2009/06/19/semantic-web%E2%80%99s-terms-companies-people-organizations/http://methainternet.wordpress.com/2009/06/19/computational-complexity-theory/http://methainternet.wordpress.com/2009/06/19/computer-science/http://methainternet.wordpress.com/2009/06/19/computability-theory-computer-science/http://methainternet.wordpress.com/http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turing_machinehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Counterexample


26/33

Information

From Logic to Ontology: The limit of TheSemantic Web

Computation

Computational problem

Computer

Mathematical object

Algorithm

Computer programming

Programming language

Mathematical proof

Mathematical logic

26
http://methainternet.wordpress.com/2009/06/19/information/http://methainternet.wordpress.com/2009/06/19/from-logic-to-ontology-the-limit-of-%E2%80%9Cthe-semantic-web%E2%80%9D-3/http://methainternet.wordpress.com/2009/06/19/from-logic-to-ontology-the-limit-of-%E2%80%9Cthe-semantic-web%E2%80%9D-3/http://methainternet.wordpress.com/2009/06/18/computation/http://methainternet.wordpress.com/2009/06/18/computational-problem/http://methainternet.wordpress.com/2009/06/18/computer/http://methainternet.wordpress.com/2009/06/18/mathematical-object/http://methainternet.wordpress.com/2009/06/18/algorithm/http://methainternet.wordpress.com/2009/06/18/computer-programming/http://methainternet.wordpress.com/2009/06/18/programming-language/http://methainternet.wordpress.com/2009/06/18/mathematical-proof/http://methainternet.wordpress.com/2009/06/18/mathematical-logic/http://methainternet.wordpress.com/2009/06/18/mathematical-logic/http://methainternet.wordpress.com/2009/06/18/mathematical-proof/http://methainternet.wordpress.com/2009/06/18/programming-language/http://methainternet.wordpress.com/2009/06/18/computer-programming/http://methainternet.wordpress.com/2009/06/18/algorithm/http://methainternet.wordpress.com/2009/06/18/mathematical-object/http://methainternet.wordpress.com/2009/06/18/computer/http://methainternet.wo

Documents

Brain, Computers and Mind: Speech and Thought in Humans, Animals and Machines. the False Statement of the Semantic Web & Artificial Intelligence (AI)