Algorithms are also not patterns.
— Wayfarer
"Algorithm design refers to a method or a mathematical process for problem-solving and engineering algorithms. The design of algorithms is part of many solution theories of operation research, such as dynamic programming and divide-and-conquer. Techniques for designing and implementing algorithm designs are also called algorithm design patterns,[42] with examples including the template method pattern and the decorator pattern." — Janus
with examples including — Janus
For me, philosophy begins with epistemology. Subjectivism and metaphysics are sophistry, not philosophy. — counterpunch
denial of the difference between reason and sensation. I am somewhat flabbergasted that this is something that has to be argued for. — Wayfarer
Although I might concede that this argument is part of a pattern. — Wayfarer
I feel that they are all important part of Philosophy. Epistemology without metaphysics would be meaningless. Objectivism doesn't exist without subjects. — Corvus
This then sets a premium on the subjects knowledge of objective reality, over even, knowledge of self revealed via contemplations upon the nature of being. — counterpunch
I mean, the example you have given doesn't prove your point. That there are 'examples' of algorithm design techniques that refer to patterns, doesn't show that algorithms are simply patterns as such. An algorithm is 'a process or set of rules to be followed in calculations or other problem-solving operations, especially by a computer.' You can write an algorithm to generate patterns - I imagine that is computer science 101. But it doesn't prove your point. — Wayfarer
(Although I might concede that this argument is part of a pattern. :roll: ) — Wayfarer
But if you didn't exist, how would it matter to you? How would you have known it, or even written that post? — Corvus
All sentences are patterns. — Janus
A clear rule determines exactly what makes a prime: it’s a whole number that can’t be exactly divided by anything except 1 and itself. But there’s no discernable pattern in the occurrence of the primes. Beyond the obvious — after the numbers 2 and 5, primes can’t be even or end in 5 — there seems to be little structure that can help to predict where the next prime will occur.
It matters that I try to exist; and that's why I wrote the post. — counterpunch
Did I answer your question? I'm not quite sure I understood it. — counterpunch
Patterns have a repeating structure. — Wayfarer
There is an undeniable evidence that you exist. — Corvus
But there's more to language and reason than can be explained in terms of pattern recognition. It is simple-minded reductionism. — Wayfarer
All that needs to be borne in mind is that both vision and thought are information processing — TheMadFool
It's not undeniable though, that's the point. I could be a figment of your imagination for all you know. From your perspective, I'm just someone passing by in a crowd unnoticed, and the wild thing is, you're the same to me - a passer by in my movie, of which I'm the star. — counterpunch
That so, nonetheless, it seems that like me, other people are able to establish valid knowledge of reality with a rationale, and logic independent of both our subjectively conceived and centred experiences. That shared valid understanding of reality is logically prior to our individual experience. It's the difference between statistics and anecdotes. — counterpunch
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.