«Godel’s Undecidable Proposition» and the Problems of Machine Readable Law

The relevance of machine readable law, the significance of which is confirmed by both the general trend and the need to consider law in the context of the development of information technologies, and the adoption of significant legal acts, including the Concept of the Development of machine readable law technologies, implies the need to form an appropriate theoretical basis and develop methodological support for relevant processes. The general problem of the «methodological insufficiency» of ensuring the processes of digital transformation of law, as well as the relevance of the development of machine reading technologies of law, predetermine the need to address, among other things, the results and achievements of natural science knowledge.The paper analyzes the correctness of the transfer of K.Godel’s conclusions in their gnoseological (epistemological) context to the legal field. Considering law as an object of machine reading in the context of «Godel’s undecidable proposition» and based on Godel’s conclusion about the inability of the system to describe itself by its own means (to prove its consistency), the author concludes that the «supra-legal» basis is culture, and law itself is seen in the system hierarchy: culture--law--legislation.It is proposed to consider the machine reading of law in the context of a semiotic paradigm, based on the widest possible coverage of sign systems reflecting the diversity of regulatory systems, and not limited only to religion, morality, ethics, law and legislation, but referring to culture as a «mega-source of a sign set» reflecting a whole complex of regulatory systems. Based on the analysis of K. Godel’s conclusions, as well as the principles of «complementarity» by N. Bohr and «uncertainty» by V. Heisenberg in their gnoseological (epistemological) aspect, a number of conclusions are drawn. These can be significant both for the methodological basis of machine reading of law and the law and for the problems of legal understanding and legal perception in general. In particular, it is concluded that of high importance is the topic of the transformation of scientific disputes on theories of legal understanding into the process of complementarity of such theories in order to achieve a state of their constructive contradiction (contradictority).

1. Agazzi E. Vliyanie Gedelya na filosofiyu matematiki [Godel’s influence on the philosophy of mathematics]. Epistemology & Philosophy of Science. 2010;25(3):16-41. (In Russ.).

2. Begishev IR, Khisamova ZI. Iskusstvennyy intellekt i robototekhnika: glossariy ponyatiy [Artficiall Intelligence and Robotics: Glossary]. Moscow; 2021. (In Russ.).

3. Bessonov AV. Eshche raz o nevernykh istolkovaniyakh vtoroy teoremy Gedelya o nepolnote [Once again about the misinterpretations of Godel’s second incompleteness theorem]. Sibirskiy filosofskiy zhurnal [Siberian Philosophical Journal]. 2020;18(3):132-143. (In Russ.).

4. Bessonov AV. O dvukh nevernykh dogmakh, svyazannykh so vtoroy teoremoy Gedelya [About two incorrect dogmas related to the second theorem of Godel]. Filosofiya nauki [Philosophy of Science]. 2014;4(63):12-17. (In Russ.).

5. Bessonov AV. Teoremy Gedelya ne dezavuiruyut programmu Gilberta [Gödel’s theorems do not disavow Hilbert’s program]. Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Filosofiya. Sotsiologiya. Politologiya [Tomsk State University Journal. Philosophy. Sotsiologiya. Political science]. 2017;40:311-318. (In Russ.).

6. Bocharov VA, Karpenko AS, Vorobyova SV, Bernstein VL. Logika [Logic]. Gumanitarnyy portal [Humanitarian portal]. Available from: https://gtmarket.ru/concepts/6892. (In Russ.).

7. Bukalov AV. Myshlenie i kvantovaya fizika: teoremy Gedelya, Tarskogo i printsip neopredelennosti [Thinking and quantum physics: The theorems of Godel, Tarski and the uncertainty principle]. Fizika soznaniya i zhizni, kosmologiya i astrofizika [Physics of consciousness and life, cosmology and astrophysics]. 2001;2:5-8. (In Russ.)

8. Varlamova NV. Rossiyskaya teoriya prava v poiskakh paradigmy [The Russian theory of law in search of a paradigm]. Zhurnal Rossiyskogo Prava [Journal of Russian Law]. 2009;12:68-84. (In Russ.).

9. Vlasenko NA. Metodologicheskie problemy sovremennoy teorii prava [Methodological problems of modern theory of law]. Zhurnal rossiyskogo prava [Journal of Russian Law]. 2019;4:5-19. (In Russ.).

10. Gavrilov SN. Mashinochtenie prava i «prostranstvennye postroeniya v zhivopisi»: poisk metodologii mashinnogo pravovospriyatiya [Machine Reading of Law and «Spatial Constructions in Painting»: Search for the Methodology of Machine Perception of Law]. Lex russica. 2022;75(9):66-78. (In Russ.).

11. Gavrilov SN. Metodologiya mashinnogo vospriyatiya prava na osnove sinekticheskogo podkhoda [Methodology of machine perception of law on the basis of a synectical approach]. Zhurnal Rossiyskogo Prava [Journal of Russian Law]. 2022;26(12):30-44. (In Russ.).

12. Gavrilov SN. «Novyy yazyk dlya novogo zakona»: mashinochtenie prava v kontekste semioticheskoy paradigmy [«A New Language for a New Law»: Machine Reading of Law in the Context of Semiotic Paradigm]. Aktual’nye problemy rossijskogo prava. 2022;17(10):124-140. (In Russ.).

13. Heisenberg W. Izbrannye filosofskie raboty: Shagi za gorizont. Chast i tseloe [Selected philosophical works: Steps beyond the Horizon. Part and whole]. St. Petersburg; 2005. (In Russ.).

14. Heisenberg W. Fizika i filosofiya. Chast i tseloe [Physics and philosophy. Part and whole]. Moscow; 1989. (In Russ.).

15. Golubev SV. Teorema Gedelya i problema legitimnosti sotsialnogo poryadka v sotsiologicheskoy nauke [Gödel’s theorem and the problem of the legitimacy of social order in sociological science]. Sotsiologiya [Sociology]. 2010;3:102-110. (In Russ.).

16. Dorozhkin AM, Shnyreva OE. Kriteriy polnoty nauchnogo znaniya v svete neklassicheskoy ratsionalnosti [Criterion of completeness of scientific knowledge in the light of non-classical rationality]. Vestnik Nizhegorodskogo universiteta imeni N.I. Lobachevskogo [Vestnik of Lobachevsky University of Nizhni Novgorod]. 2014;6:26-31. (In Russ.).

17. Zakhartsev SI, Salnikov VP. Chto est komprekhendnaya teoriya prava? [What is a comprehensive theory of law?]. Yuridicheskaya nauka [Legal Science]. 2016;3:5-9. (In Russ.).

18. Zotov AF, Melvil YuK. Zapadnaya filosofiya XX veka: uchebnoe posobie [Western Philosophy of the 20th century: A textbook]. Moscow: Prospekt Publ.; 1998. (In Russ.).

19. Ivanskiy VP. Informatsionno-kognitivnoe (kvantovoe) pravoponimanie: ponyatie i kriterii [Information-cognitive (quantum) legal understanding: Concept and criteria]. Izvestiya vysshikh uchebnykh zavedeniy. Pravovedenie [Higher Educational Institutions Bulletin. Jurisprudence]. 2014;4(315):44-60. (In Russ.).

20. Ivanskiy VP. O novoy pravovoy paradigme: informatsionno-kvantovaya (kognitivnaya) teoriya prava [On the new legal paradigm: Information-quantum (cognitive) theory of law]. Sovremennoe pravo [Modern law]. 2014;2:4-11. (In Russ.).

21. Izmaylova AM. O kritike teoremy K. Gedelya o nepolnote V. Bessonovym [On criticism of K. Godel’s incompleteness theorem by A.V. Bessonov]. Grani nauki [Facets of Science]. 2018;6(1):7-9. (In Russ.).

22. Karamyshev IS. Smert matematika? [Death of a mathematician?]. Vestnik Moskovskogo Universiteta. Seriya 7, Filosofiya [Bulletin of the Moscow University. Series 7, Philosophy]. 2019;1:95-108. (In Russ.).

23. Kerimov DA. Metodologiya prava: predmet, funktsii, problemy filosofii prava [Methodology of law: Subject, functions, problems of philosophy of law]. Moscow; 2003. (In Russ.).

24. Kun T. Struktura nauchnykh revolyutsiy [Structure of Scientific Revolutions]. Moscow; 1974. (In Russ.).

25. Lobovikov VO. Logiko-filosofskoe obosnovanie gipotezy o formalno-eticheskoy protivorechivosti formalnoy arifmetiki, issledovannoy K. Gedelem [Logical and philosophical substantiation of the hypothesis about the formal-ethical inconsistency of formal arithmetic, studied by K. Goedel]. Izvestiya Uralskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Seriya 3, Obshchestvennye nauki [Izvestia. Ural Federal University Journal. Series 3, Social Sciences]. 2011;6(1):14-28. (In Russ.).

26. Lobovikov VO. Problema nepolnoty formalno opredelennykh sistem norm pozitivnogo prava, pervaya teorema Gedelya o nepolnote i yuridicheskie fiktsii kak vazhnyy komponent yuridicheskoy tekhniki [The problem of incompleteness of formally defined systems of positive law norms, Godel’s first incompleteness theorem and legal fictions as an important component of legal technique]. Nauchnyy vestnik Omskoy akademii MVD Rossii [Scientific Bulletin of the Omsk Academy of the MIA of Russia]. 2013;2(49):53-57. (In Russ.).

27. Manin YuI. Teorema Gedelya [Godel’s Theorem]. Priroda [Nature]. 1975;12:80-87. (In Russ.).

28. Pashentsev DA. Modernizatsiya metodologii pravovykh issledovaniy v usloviyakh stanovleniya novoy nauchnoy ratsionalnosti [Modernization of the methodology of legal research in the context of the formation of a new scientific rationality]. Zhurnal rossiyskogo prava [Journal of Russian Law]. 2020;8:5-13. (In Russ.)

29. Podnieks KM. Vokrug teoremy Gedelya [Around Godel’s theorem]. Riga; 1992. (In Russ.).

30. Ponkin IV. Kontsept mashinochitaemogo i mashinoispolnyaemogo prava: aktualnost, naznachenie, mesto v PerTexe, soderzhanie, ontologiya i perspektivy [The concept of machine-readable and machine-executable rights: relevance, purpose, place in PerText, content, ontology and prospects]. International journal of open information technologies. 2020;8(10):59-69. (In Russ.).

31. Puchkov VO. Ponyatiyno-terminologicheskiy apparat pravovedeniya i perspektiva «mashinizatsii» prava: vozmozhno li predstavlenie pravovykh konstruktsiy sredstvami λ-ischisleniya? [Conceptual and terminological apparatus of jurisprudence and the prospect of «mechanization» of law: is it possible to represent legal constructions by means of λ-calculus?]. Yuridicheskiy vestnik DGU [Law Herald of Dagestan State University]. 2021;40(4):36-42. (In Russ.).

32. Khabrieva TYa, Chernogor NN. Pravo v usloviyakh tsifrovoy realnosti [Law in the conditions of digital reality]. Zhurnal Rossiyskogo Prava [Journal of Russian Law]. 2018;1:85-102. (In Russ.).

33. Tselishchev VV. Istinnost gedeleva predlozheniya: vnutrenniy i vneshnie voprosy [The truth of Godel’s proposition: Internal and external issues]. Filosofiya nauki [Philosophy of Science]. 2014;1(60):16-38. (In Russ.).

34. Tselishchev VV. Subektivnaya matematika Gedelya: samoochevidnye utverzhdeniya matematiki i artefakty sintaksicheskikh struktur [Gödel’s subjective mathematics: Self-evident statements of mathematics and artifacts of syntactic structures]. Filosofiya nauki [Philosophy of Science]. 2015;1(64):3-14. (In Russ.).

35. Chestnov IL. Postklassicheskaya teoriya prava: monografiya [Post-classical theory of law: A monograph]. St. Petersburg: Alef-Press; 2012. (In Russ.).

36. Shkorubskaya EG. Problemnoe pole teorem Gedelya o nepolnote [Problem field of Gödel’s incompleteness theorems]. Uchenye zapiski Krymskogo federalnogo universiteta imeni V.I. Vernadskogo. Filosofiya. Politologiya. Kulturologiya [Scientific notes of the V.I. Vernadsky Crimean Federal University. Philosophy. Political science. Cultural studies]. 2015;1-2:189-297. (In Russ.)