Don't go Jordan Peterson on me! — TheMadFool
Just a feeling... — TheMadFool
No, seriously - where the hell did that association come from?
If you’re going to make comparisons like that, you’d better be prepared to back it up. — Possibility
Now, tim wood claims that patterns are mental (all in the head), we could even say it's projected onto the world (look up pareidolia) by our minds - I guess tim wood means to say we see what our minds want to see. However, that means there's no necessity for the world to behave in ways that correspond to the patterns we seem to discern in it unless tim wood wants to claim that our minds have some causal power over the world, able to make it do what we feel it should do (pattern), a preposterous claim, don't you think? I can, for example, imagine a pattern in the world, this pattern being (say) adding nitric acid to plants make it grow but me imagining that hypothetical pattern won't be actualized in the real world. — TheMadFool
I don’t think that’s what Tim IS saying, but I’ll let him clarify that one. Suffice to say, our minds determine predictions we make in relation to the world, and any relative regularities we perceive construct patterns in our predictions, which inform our actions.
How do you think we perceive relative regularities in a process? How do we even consolidate a process at all? By constructing an abstract representation from a series of periodic observations in the past. So are we really seeing the pattern ‘out there’, or are we perceiving it in our mind and then attributing it to our predictions about the world? — Possibility
Now, tim wood claims that patterns are mental (all in the head), we could even say it's projected onto the world (look up pareidolia) by our minds - I guess tim wood means to say we see what our minds want to see. — TheMadFool
I'm happy, happy enough if you agree that patterns can be used to make predictions because that means you're testing the world to see if the pattern you abstracted is correct or not, correct in the sense whether your predictions come true or not. In effect you're acknowledging the existence of an "out there" in this. — TheMadFool
Only in the sense that any information we receive is incomplete. Not testing the world - testing our predictive representations of the world. It’s not about whether my predictions ‘come true’ or not, but about whether they are useful in determining future interaction. Incorrect predictions can be just as useful as correct ones. — Possibility
Only in the sense that any information we receive is incomplete — Possibility
Given that order is a relation between two things, what sense does it make to say order is intrinsic to two things, one of which is not an observer sufficiently intelligent enough to estimate it? It follows that it makes no difference whatsoever, and is therefore utterly meaningless, for there to be patterns as an intrinsic condition of the empirical domain, if there is no intelligence to which the pattern is comprehensible. — Mww
How does pattern recognition happen? — unenlightened
Does not this come down to definitions and understandings? And thus without a determinate meaning without them, and only meaningful within them?The claim is ‘pattern recognition is the essence of philosophy’. — Wayfarer
A provocative sentence, but the meaning escapes me. Perhaps an example would make it clear. Do you have one?Reason can discern relationships, causes, principles and patterns. But not all of the former can be reduced to the latter. — Wayfarer
Given that order is a relation between two things, what sense does it make to say order is intrinsic to two things, one of which is not an observer sufficiently intelligent enough to estimate it? — Mww
"But the world corresponds to them!" is the cry. No, the world doesn't, not ever. Except of course as it seems to - but that is all a matter of mind. All the resemblances, repetitions, patterns, are abstractions from the world as a matter of idea by a mind. The efficacy of all of which a testimony to the power of mind. — tim wood
it's not one of the far too many many Kant threads. — unenlightened
Because to recognise a pattern is to simplify, and it is the thing that science and philosophy and literature and music all lean towards; the making sense of complexity and its subsumption into a pattern. — unenlightened
11.3k
How does pattern recognition happen?
— unenlightened
Perception & Memory
1. Perceive A, parts & whole. Record in memory
2. Perceive B, parts & whole. Cross-check perception of A with memory of A. Match! Pattern. No match! No pattern. — TheMadFool
How does the immune system recognise the breakdown products of cell death? How does a computer learn to play Go, and come up with a strategy that had not been known to humans? — unenlightened
Btw, I'm still not clear on the thesis we're all ignoring — Srap Tasmaner
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.