Ooh! Ooh! The Haugueland paper looks extremely interesting! The relation between patterns and the things that realize those patterns is something I've been fascinated by since I began reading philosophy.

Can't let "being" be, it seems.

If only someone nominated Basically all of Philosophy is Silly But Here's Just a Few Brief Synopses of Philosophical Schools of Thought, Just The Bare Minimum Necessary To Allow The Reader To Speak Knowingly and Sardonically About Them & How To Pretend This is Pragmatism by Arnold Z. Heideggerwasanazi

Ah, you wish to make me sad.

You want to know what is? Read The Light of the World.

Just retaliatory measures. You make me sad! I ♥ being and hate to see her scorned.

Hell hath no fury like a being-lover scorned? Well, "Let be be the finale of seem." We're in the kitchen with the concupiscent curds. Or Dinah; I'm not sure which. It's not so bad.

Please, being-frank, please, I have been-adjacent-to to lecture 7 in a ready-at-hand series about being-with Heidegger today and I'm being'd out. I have fallen, I confess I am truly inauthentic and all I crave is my ownmost.

Sorry, but only a god (perhaps he caught himself before he said "Fuhrer") can save you.

We can't escape being. The entities that we are comport ourselves towards our being, in fact we deliver ourselves over to our own being. Our being what-we are, as far as we can speak of it at all must be conceived of in terms of our being.

I will name my first born Toby (pronounced to-be).

Last call for votes!

Note to readers of Haugeland's Pattern and Being:

Haugeland discusses briefly Conway's Game of Life, which had been used by Dennett to illustrate patterns, their recognition, and ontological status. There is a nice wikipedia page on Conway's Game of Life, and one can easily find online simulators just in case some readers aren't familiar with it.