re: #491 Cato the Elder

Which was my whole point yesterday, really, about the downside of the “Enlightenment”.

Well, that’s a very strange misunderstanding of the Enlightenment, then. Some people involved in the Enlightenment thought man capable of perfect reason. Not most of them. The more religious members of the Enlightenment thought perfect rationality was reserved for God, and even amongst the least religious, most were well aware of the imperfects that permeated thought. That was one of the bases for the scientific method; to separate out the gold of proof from the chaff of supposition. The Liebnitzean idea that not only could all true things be thought but all possible but untrue things, and all true but impossible things, hinted at what was to come with Gdel— except that Liebnitz put it in terms of infinite possible Adams.