[rendall]

It should be at least theoretically possible for an AI to identify contradictions, incoherence and inconsistency in a set of assertions. So, not identifying falsehood per se, but assigning a fairly accurate likelihood score based solely on the internal logic of the symbol stream. In other words, a bullshit detector.

[nimish]

> It should be at least theoretically possible for an AI to identify contradictions, incoherence and inconsistency in a set of assertions

Not in the slightest. Likelihood of veracity is opinion -- laundering it as fact to make some people feel better doesn't make it any more subjective, or authoritative.

[rendall]

I think we're not disagreeing, exactly.

As a simple example, here is a set of assertions:

* The moon is made of green cheese

* The moon is crystalline rock surrounding an iron core

It wouldn't take an AI to see that both of these can't be true, even if we weren't clear about what a moon is made of, exactly.

Some of our common understanding could contain more complicated internal contradictions that might be harder for a human to tease apart, that an AI might be able to identify.

[akiselev]

How would the AI know that "made of green cheese" isn't just another way of saying "crystalline rock surrounding an iron core"? To find a contradiction in a statement like "X is A. X is B" it'd first have to be intelligent enough to know when A != B. In your example, that's not as simple as 1 != 0.