On Corrigibility
of the Pope
Elsewhere
on this blog I have argued against papal infallibility on metamathematical
grounds. As Goedel proved in his Second Incompleteness Theorem, no arithmetical deductive system can
truthfully prove its own consistency. If it can prove that it can’t fail, then
that proof itself is a failure. Perfectionism is jinxed!
This
jinx afflicts not just papal theology, but also national security doctrines,
corporate planning, and financial structures. In each case institutions are
tempted by the deadly illusion of absolute self-justification.
Infallibilism
fails because it cannot admit error, therefore it cannot correct for error,
therefore it accumulates error. Counter to infallibility is error-correction,
also known as corrigibility. Science
is ostensibly based upon a philosophy of corrigibility. Note that I said
‘ostensibly’ based upon a philosophy of corrigibility, in keeping with that
very philosophy!
The
difference between infallibility and corrigibility is that the former demands
our respect, and the latter merely deserves it.
The
latest two Popes may be taking my advice to abandon papal infallibility and
embrace papal corrigibility. Francis reversed course on several issues, and
Benedict reversed course on being Pope.
No comments:
Post a Comment