Reality vs Perception

This is the main board for discussing philosophy - formal, informal and in between.

Moderator: Only_Humean

Forum rules
Forum Philosophy

Re: Reality vs Perception

Postby Meno_ » Sun Feb 18, 2018 6:22 pm

encode_decode wrote:I have also been thinking about tacit knowledge. I agree with Polanyi that all knowledge is rooted in tacit knowledge. I can make an extension here and say that memories are never stored exactly as the experience that prompts them. No memories are fully codified.

There is also a mathematical principle covering information entropy that tells me that the human brain expresses more entropy when storing and recalling memories.

I have an AI model that is flexible enough to not be overcome by the entropy.

I was going to add something else but it seems to have slipped my mind.



It is paradoxical any way, as is the comments above on Descartes, Nietzsche and Sartre. Ironically its a foreward progressing entropic process.


You are the very embodiment of that principle, I must say.

If it slipped Your mind, recovery may come if You are willing to wait and discern later what it may have been

And lastly encode, what is the general makeup of an AI which can overcome entropy? Would it be reverse engineered somehow to reduce the effects of a modeling?
Of You are able to discuss this in philosophically relevant terms or may lay a foundation for further elaboration. and prove useful, as far as it concerns the eventual relative outcome of this forum's topic.

Or possibly this a kind of exploratory investigation into the
Specificity of a claim against general propositions? I hope so, and in embodied claims, no specificity is required , at least not in this format.

Much appreciated.
Black Sun
Meno_
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3262
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2015 2:39 am
Location: Mysterium Tremendum

Re: Reality vs Perception

Postby Serendipper » Mon Feb 19, 2018 9:01 am

Meno_ wrote:what is the general makeup of an AI which can overcome entropy? Would it be reverse engineered somehow to reduce the effects of a modeling?

Is not intelligence a reduction of entropy?

There are two ways of looking at that since intelligence is an organization, but expression of information tends towards randomness.

0000000 carries no information and is most ordered.
01010101 or repeat (01) carries more information and is somewhat ordered.
0110100 carries yet more information and is most random (least ordered) of the bunch.

So is intelligence entropic or is it not? I'm confused lol
Serendipper
Thinker
 
Posts: 908
Joined: Sun Aug 13, 2017 7:30 pm

Re: Reality vs Perception

Postby Serendipper » Mon Feb 19, 2018 9:30 am

encode_decode wrote:I am still reading up on nihilism as it pertains to Nietzsche as well as a little extra.

Nihilism probably means whatever people want it to mean. I haven't read Nietzsche either, except wikipedia, so I can't speak for him, but for me it means purposelessness, which is the purpose. Not death and abyss and blackness. Just nonteleological serendipity which is better represented by Wu Wei https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wu_wei Mindless and purposeless = fun. Fun is a simple 3-letter word juxtaposed against purpose.

For instance I am not talking about this for any reason, but simply because it's fun and enjoyable. There is no purpose and that is the purpose. That's about as nihilistic as one can get, I would think. But to insist upon some blackness or emptiness comes because of some purpose of the one insisting and that's not nihilism.

There can only be two motivations: Purpose and nonpurpose. Either you have an agenda, a goal, or you're doing whatever, mindlessly.

So what Nietzsche said is a trivia for those interested in reading what he said. Mark Twain said to be careful of reading health books or one may die of a misprint, so I don't want to be too wrapped up in other people's stuff.

Geese flying over a lake do not intend to cast their reflections and the lake has no mind to retain their image. Birds do not sing for the advancement of music. There is no purpose to anything and that is the best purpose to have ;)
Serendipper
Thinker
 
Posts: 908
Joined: Sun Aug 13, 2017 7:30 pm

Re: Reality vs Perception

Postby encode_decode » Mon Feb 19, 2018 9:31 am

Serendipper wrote:Is not intelligence a reduction of entropy?

Without elaborating, I would answer, yes. Intelligence is a reduction of entropy.

Serendipper wrote:There are two ways of looking at that since intelligence is an organization, but expression of information tends towards randomness.

0000000 carries no information and is most ordered.
01010101 or repeat (01) carries more information and is somewhat ordered.
0110100 carries yet more information and is most random (least ordered) of the bunch.

A perfect example.

Serendipper wrote:So is intelligence entropic or is it not? I'm confused lol

I would say that intelligence is somewhat entropic - that intelligence is only a reduction of entropy.

I reserve the right to change my mind, lol.
    Neosophi | HOME | FORUM

    Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony
    (James S Saint)


    It’s not that truth itself is being eroded per se, it’s that fragmental falsification appears to be increasing.
    (Anomaly654)


    Mind is an ever changing dimension that is bound to reality, logic and emotion.
    (Myself)
    User avatar
    encode_decode
    Philosopher
     
    Posts: 1177
    Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 4:07 pm

    Re: Reality vs Perception

    Postby Serendipper » Mon Feb 19, 2018 9:47 am

    encode_decode wrote:I reserve the right to change my mind, lol.

    lol that's a nice touch :)

    If gravity is anetropic, AI would be the blackhole of intelligence... an explosion in reverse.
    Serendipper
    Thinker
     
    Posts: 908
    Joined: Sun Aug 13, 2017 7:30 pm

    Re: Reality vs Perception

    Postby encode_decode » Mon Feb 19, 2018 9:51 am

    Serendipper wrote:lol that's a nice touch :)

    If gravity is anetropic, AI would be the blackhole of intelligence... an explosion in reverse.

    :clap:
      Neosophi | HOME | FORUM

      Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony
      (James S Saint)


      It’s not that truth itself is being eroded per se, it’s that fragmental falsification appears to be increasing.
      (Anomaly654)


      Mind is an ever changing dimension that is bound to reality, logic and emotion.
      (Myself)
      User avatar
      encode_decode
      Philosopher
       
      Posts: 1177
      Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 4:07 pm

      Re: Reality vs Perception

      Postby encode_decode » Mon Feb 19, 2018 9:55 am

      Serendipper wrote:
      encode_decode wrote:I am still reading up on nihilism as it pertains to Nietzsche as well as a little extra.

      Nihilism probably means whatever people want it to mean. I haven't read Nietzsche either, except wikipedia, so I can't speak for him, but for me it means purposelessness, which is the purpose. Not death and abyss and blackness. Just nonteleological serendipity which is better represented by Wu Wei https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wu_wei Mindless and purposeless = fun. Fun is a simple 3-letter word juxtaposed against purpose.

      Yes, I am starting to wonder about this. I have read a Wikipedia article and another article provided by some kind soul. I like what you wrote about Wu Wei, I think I might read up a little on that and see what I can come up with. I guess I might have to read Nietzsche to see what all the fuss is about.
        Neosophi | HOME | FORUM

        Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony
        (James S Saint)


        It’s not that truth itself is being eroded per se, it’s that fragmental falsification appears to be increasing.
        (Anomaly654)


        Mind is an ever changing dimension that is bound to reality, logic and emotion.
        (Myself)
        User avatar
        encode_decode
        Philosopher
         
        Posts: 1177
        Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 4:07 pm

        Re: Reality vs Perception

        Postby Meno_ » Mon Feb 19, 2018 11:01 am

        Quite, .........what can I say.
        Black Sun
        Meno_
        Philosopher
         
        Posts: 3262
        Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2015 2:39 am
        Location: Mysterium Tremendum

        Re: Reality vs Perception

        Postby Serendipper » Mon Feb 19, 2018 11:06 am

        encode_decode wrote:I guess I might have to read Nietzsche to see what all the fuss is about.

        Honestly, I think it's the name: Nietzsche. It's like Porsche.

        You ever wonder if the success of companies hinges upon a name? Apple, Google, Coke, Nike. Almost seems like picking the right name is half the battle; the rest is just details. Are you going to shop on ebid or ebay? Is "ay" preferable to "id"?

        bid, did, grid, hid, kid, lid, mid, quid, rid, schmid, scrid, sid, skid, slid, smid, squid

        'kay, bay, bray, chez, clay, day, flay, fray, gay, gray, hay, hey, jay, kay, lay, may, nay, pay, play, pray, prey, ray, say, slay, sleigh, stay, stray, sway, they, tray, way, weigh, whey, yay

        Ebay wins. It's more identifiable and sounds friendlier.

        Nietzsche is a cool name. It's hard to pronounce, hard to spell, German engineering is fashionable and is equated with intelligence.
        Serendipper
        Thinker
         
        Posts: 908
        Joined: Sun Aug 13, 2017 7:30 pm

        Re: Reality vs Perception

        Postby Meno_ » Mon Feb 19, 2018 12:24 pm

        Even if Nietzsche is read, or contraryly, not, since he was more poet and mystic than overt metaphysician, . the critique against not reading him, or not reading him as he should be read, does not hold water.hmHis is a sort of anti Christ-anti parable type intrusion into the mortal psyche.
        Black Sun
        Meno_
        Philosopher
         
        Posts: 3262
        Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2015 2:39 am
        Location: Mysterium Tremendum

        Re: Reality vs Perception

        Postby encode_decode » Tue Feb 20, 2018 5:02 am

        I will take the following as a requirement of the rest of this post:

        Meno_ wrote:Of You are able to discuss this in philosophically relevant terms or may lay a foundation for further elaboration. and prove useful, as far as it concerns the eventual relative outcome of this forum's topic.

        What do you class as philosophically relevant terms? What terms work for me may not work for you. I could lay the ground for further elaboration, I believe that is easy enough. As far as what use it would serve, well, I guess that is the more difficult thing to ascertain up front. The relative outcome of this forums topic still alludes me.

        Meno_ wrote:And lastly encode, what is the general makeup of an AI which can overcome entropy?

        First of all it is not so much about overcoming entropy as it is about working inside an already relatively entropic state. With that being said, it is easy enough to illustrate the principle behind working inside an entropic state but that would depend on whether you are willing to accept a particular model of AI and I am not an expert on all of them - in fact I try to base my models on what I perceive to be human intelligence which I may have wrong.

        Meno_ wrote:Would it be reverse engineered somehow to reduce the effects of a modeling?

        No, it should not be reverse engineered because overcoming entropy is technically quite easy in concept and because computer hardware and software works extremely well with concept building it would be too easy to get a computer to overcome entropy - providing a computer is the medium that is used to create an AI.

        Meno_ wrote:Or possibly this a kind of exploratory investigation into the Specificity of a claim against general propositions? I hope so, and in embodied claims, no specificity is required , at least not in this format.

        This to me depends on how one is situated with regard to general propositions. You would have to further what you mean.
          Neosophi | HOME | FORUM

          Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony
          (James S Saint)


          It’s not that truth itself is being eroded per se, it’s that fragmental falsification appears to be increasing.
          (Anomaly654)


          Mind is an ever changing dimension that is bound to reality, logic and emotion.
          (Myself)
          User avatar
          encode_decode
          Philosopher
           
          Posts: 1177
          Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 4:07 pm

          Re: Reality vs Perception

          Postby Meno_ » Tue Feb 20, 2018 5:16 am

          I've been writing about this more today in another venue, and will try to answer this last one , because You have given me more than I can answer at this late hour. So to further this, St. James intimated as such. as to the reasons why the relationship between Reality and Perception is better untangled , at least from an analytical mind's point of view , from general to specific propositions.

          I think Reality can be taken as a given, and work itself down to perceptions, in spite of , and we talked of this previously here, mistaken notions between precepts and sense data.
          Given what we know about the logical basis of modeling in general, it can be safely said that any model needs reconstruction based vestiges , which had at one point cohesive qualities to form such a model.

          Such a reconstruction must follow the probable type of the deconstructed 'original' or becomes virtually bound more to probable formal arranged centers of operation, which adhere tacitly(Polanyi) to embedded ones,with it's structural patterns of mathematical notation.

          This is merely a derivation more from more general or hidden particulars for processing more identifiable
          patterns.

          I must excuse myself for this intuitive approach relqted to philosophical underpinnings , whereas it may have relevance as well to mathematical abstraction.

          I agree with St.James that reality consists of precepts of posited bits but such position is not some juxtaposition of formal and substantial elements, but of interaction between them , not as some form of transcendent. Although a precept appears as priority , it is only by conventional meaning does it appears as such.

          Reality vs perception is not a priorotozation of the shift from a deductive logical sequencing of meaning bits to an inductive ones, since modeling reconstructs reality through changeless bits of information which are brought together by the most probable patterns toward saturation of redundant bits.

          This process goes on until a successfully modeled reconstruction is achieved, where its sequentially repeated through varying integrative cycles.

          This is based on the most general philosophic notions , and therefore hypothetical.



          The trend in computation is less and less reliance for proofs and more and more reliance on the presumptive integrity of the hypothetical acceptance reality as a given.

          There is a time approaching when only very complex computers can prove the various levels of lesser computer generated sub-programs. This time ideal is fast approaching. , The objective integrity will need to be confirmed by the operational coherence of all subsequent systems. But here I feel I am not saying anything new.
          Last edited by Meno_ on Tue Feb 20, 2018 6:40 am, edited 2 times in total.
          Black Sun
          Meno_
          Philosopher
           
          Posts: 3262
          Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2015 2:39 am
          Location: Mysterium Tremendum

          Re: Reality vs Perception

          Postby encode_decode » Tue Feb 20, 2018 5:23 am

          I will further add that:

          1. Reality is entropy
          2. Perception is not entropy
          The above holds if perception is what we broadly consider as healthy perception.

          I should mention that I am not speaking in absolute terms here.
            Neosophi | HOME | FORUM

            Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony
            (James S Saint)


            It’s not that truth itself is being eroded per se, it’s that fragmental falsification appears to be increasing.
            (Anomaly654)


            Mind is an ever changing dimension that is bound to reality, logic and emotion.
            (Myself)
            User avatar
            encode_decode
            Philosopher
             
            Posts: 1177
            Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 4:07 pm

            Re: Reality vs Perception

            Postby Meno_ » Tue Feb 20, 2018 6:15 am

            encode_decode wrote:I will further add that:

            1. Reality is entropy
            2. Perception is not entropy
            The above holds if perception is what we broadly consider as healthy perception.

            I should mention that I am not speaking in absolute terms here.



            Well put, and You could not conceivably model as such, either., except through a return to objective and cohesive formal arrangements.

            The idea of a difference between a healthy or unhealthy perception also breaks down below and above certain parameters, and the question can only be resolved by integrative systems cohesive with the modeling system on the whole but not in the absolute.

            But such precision might be more on the level of application rather than design.
            Black Sun
            Meno_
            Philosopher
             
            Posts: 3262
            Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2015 2:39 am
            Location: Mysterium Tremendum

            Re: Reality vs Perception

            Postby encode_decode » Wed Feb 21, 2018 10:25 am

              Meno_

              When approaching your post, it is hard for me to know whether I should use my normal technique of breaking it down section by section or try to get at the meat of the situation by finding what I deem to be the most appropriate information and expand from there. So hopefully I am covering enough of what you are writing.

              Meno_ wrote:St. James intimated as such. as to the reasons why the relationship between Reality and Perception is better untangled , at least from an analytical mind's point of view , from general to specific propositions.

              OK, I will do my best but I can not make any promises as I sometimes get lost in thought in my current condition.

              When you say St. James it reminds me of James S Saint for some reason.

              Meno_ wrote:Given what we know about the logical basis of modeling in general, it can be safely said that any model needs reconstruction based vestiges, which had at one point cohesive qualities to form such a model.

              I mostly agree and think that if intelligence is a reduction of information entropy then conscious apprehension and subconscious processing is the means of putting these fragments of information back together. The mind(conscious and subconscious) then serves the purpose of seeking out, defragmenting and understanding the surrounding reality; but with what purpose? It would seem that perception is polar opposite to reality in many regards following this line of thought, and therefore perception has the purpose of simply avoiding the entropy that reality creates.

              I am perhaps looking at this from a slightly different angle - I have wondered whether multiple angles is something that the perception works with to solve its reality puzzles and that all angles only have one of two states and they are: somewhat correct and somewhat incorrect, further complicating the puzzle. The perception is taking many snapshots of reality in the attempt to apprehend realistic states that can be sewn together into a perceptive moving picture of sorts at least indicating that the perception is also in motion alongside reality << Just a side thought but I think somewhat valid.
                Neosophi | HOME | FORUM

                Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony
                (James S Saint)


                It’s not that truth itself is being eroded per se, it’s that fragmental falsification appears to be increasing.
                (Anomaly654)


                Mind is an ever changing dimension that is bound to reality, logic and emotion.
                (Myself)
                User avatar
                encode_decode
                Philosopher
                 
                Posts: 1177
                Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 4:07 pm

                Re: Reality vs Perception

                Postby encode_decode » Thu Feb 22, 2018 12:48 pm

                  I was reading of William James in the last couple of days and I found myself strongly disagreeing with him.

                  Hopefully I will remember the specifics of the disagreement and be able to post it here.

                  :-k
                    Neosophi | HOME | FORUM

                    Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony
                    (James S Saint)


                    It’s not that truth itself is being eroded per se, it’s that fragmental falsification appears to be increasing.
                    (Anomaly654)


                    Mind is an ever changing dimension that is bound to reality, logic and emotion.
                    (Myself)
                    User avatar
                    encode_decode
                    Philosopher
                     
                    Posts: 1177
                    Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 4:07 pm

                    Re: Reality vs Perception

                    Postby Meno_ » Thu Feb 22, 2018 4:43 pm

                    You have given me a lot of food for thought, after breakfast I shall try to give much more time to Your post here. The three Jameses is an ironic twist but is unsure if it was totally unintended. Be back soon.
                    Black Sun
                    Meno_
                    Philosopher
                     
                    Posts: 3262
                    Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2015 2:39 am
                    Location: Mysterium Tremendum

                    Re: Reality vs Perception

                    Postby Meno_ » Thu Feb 22, 2018 6:08 pm

                    encode_decode wrote:
                      Meno_

                      When approaching your post, it is hard for me to know whether I should use my normal technique of breaking it down section by section or try to get at the meat of the situation by finding what I deem to be the most appropriate information and expand from there. So hopefully I am covering enough of what you are writing.

                      Meno_ wrote:St. James intimated as such. as to the reasons why the relationship between Reality and Perception is better untangled , at least from an analytical mind's point of view , from general to specific propositions.

                      OK, I will do my best but I can not make any promises as I sometimes get lost in thought in my current condition.

                      When you say St. James it reminds me of James S Saint for some reason.

                      Meno_ wrote:Given what we know about the logical basis of modeling in general, it can be safely said that any model needs reconstruction based vestiges, which had at one point cohesive qualities to form such a model.

                      I mostly agree and think that if intelligence is a reduction of information entropy then conscious apprehension and subconscious processing is the means of putting these fragments of information back together. The mind(conscious and subconscious) then serves the purpose of seeking out, defragmenting and understanding the surrounding reality; but with what purpose? It would seem that perception is polar opposite to reality in many regards following this line of thought, and therefore perception has the purpose of simply avoiding the entropy that reality creates.

                      I am perhaps looking at this from a slightly different angle - I have wondered whether multiple angles is something that the perception works with to solve its reality puzzles and that all angles only have one of two states and they are: somewhat correct and somewhat incorrect, further complicating the puzzle. The perception is taking many snapshots of reality in the attempt to apprehend realistic states that can be sewn together into a perceptive moving picture of sorts at least indicating that the perception is also in motion alongside reality << Just a side thought but I think somewhat valid.



                      In other words and I'm always reducing these fragments, for simplificaton's sake; the difference between precepts -percepts and perception on variable levels, presents with a continua, in order : to maintain reality without closing usual channels of perception. Just like with a camera the variation is dealt with
                      integral manipulation between aperture and shutter speed.

                      In a way that manipulation can be trans posed to a wider meaning of accommodation, which could answer Your query about what form of writing is preferred by You. I think the answer to that is simply in my courtyard , for my disability regarding particularization vis., lack of knowledge to use my phone. I will look into it , because I do like to use both formats, and I don't want to add inconveniencing as another challenging deficit to overcome.

                      . Ill try to overcome that issue.
                      Last edited by Meno_ on Thu Feb 22, 2018 8:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.
                      Black Sun
                      Meno_
                      Philosopher
                       
                      Posts: 3262
                      Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2015 2:39 am
                      Location: Mysterium Tremendum

                      Re: Reality vs Perception

                      Postby Magnus Anderson » Thu Feb 22, 2018 7:53 pm

                      encode_decode wrote:
                        I was reading of William James in the last couple of days and I found myself strongly disagreeing with him.

                        Hopefully I will remember the specifics of the disagreement and be able to post it here.

                        :-k


                        I have some interest in the philosophy of his contemporary Charles Sanders Peirce. You know, the guy who is considered to be the father of American pragmatism (but who did not enjoy the affiliation with James which is what motivated him to change the name of his philosophical position from "pragmatism" to "pragmaticism".) I was doing some AI research when I stumbled upon him. One person led to another and then I eventually ran into this guy. He's either the most important philosopher that has ever lived (Bertrand Russell said something to that effect) or he's a fool. I can't decide because he's obscure. He was a scientist; he wrote a paper on how to be clear; he was obsessed with defining his terms; and yet, his writings were nevertheless obscure. Strange. His entire philosophy is based on the idea that there are three fundamental categories: firstness (potential), secondness (facts) and thirdness (law.) His understanding of the perceiver-perceived relationship follows this train of thought. He rejects the standard dyadic relation between signifier and signified in favor of a triadic relation that goes something like sign-object-interpretant. The guy is one of the founders of semiotics albeit modern semiotics leans heavily on the side of Ferdinand de Saussure's semiology (Saussure was the other founder) which is dyadic.

                        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semiotics
                        While the Saussurean semiotic is dyadic (sign/syntax, signal/semantics), the Peircean semiotic is triadic (sign, object, interpretant), being conceived as philosophical logic studied in terms of signs that are not always linguistic or artificial. The Peircean semiotic addresses not only the external communication mechanism, as per Saussure, but the internal representation machine, investigating not just sign processes, or modes of inference, but the whole inquiry process in general. Peircean semiotics further subdivides each of the three triadic elements into three sub-types. For example, signs can be icons, indices, and symbols.


                        Happy deciphering:
                        http://www.paulburgess.org/triadic.html

                        He also thought that everything is a sign. This would be the position of pansemiosis.
                        Last edited by Magnus Anderson on Thu Feb 22, 2018 8:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.
                        I got a philosophy degree, I'm not upset that I can't find work as a philosopher. It was my decision, and I knew that it wasn't a money making degree, so I get money elsewhere.
                        -- Mr. Reasonable
                        User avatar
                        Magnus Anderson
                        Philosopher
                         
                        Posts: 3694
                        Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2014 7:26 pm

                        Re: Reality vs Perception

                        Postby Meno_ » Thu Feb 22, 2018 8:06 pm

                        Magnus Anderson wrote:
                        encode_decode wrote:
                          I was reading of William James in the last couple of days and I found myself strongly disagreeing with him.

                          Hopefully I will remember the specifics of the disagreement and be able to post it here.

                          :-k


                          I have some interest in the philosophy of his contemporary Charles Sanders Peirce. You know, the guy who is considered to be the father of American pragmatism (but who did not enjoy the affiliation with James which is what motivated him to change the name of his philosophical position from "pragmatism" to "pragmaticism".) I was doing some AI research when I stumbled upon him. One person led to another and then I eventually ran into this guy. He's either the most important philosopher that has ever existed (Bertrand Russell said something to that effect) or he's a fool. I can't decide because he's obscure. He was a scientist; he wrote a paper on how to be clear; he was obsessed with defining his terms; and yet, his writings were nevertheless obscure. Strange. His entire philosophy is based on the idea that there are three fundamental categories: firstness (potential), secondness (facts) and thirdness (law.) His understanding of the perceiver-perceived relationship follows this train of thought. He rejects the standard dyadic relation between signifier and signified in favor of a triadic relation that goes something like sign-object-interpretant. The guy is one of the founders of semiotics albeit modern semiotics leans heavily on the side of Ferdinand de Saussure's semiology (Saussure was the other founder) which is dyadic.

                          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semiotics
                          While the Saussurean semiotic is dyadic (sign/syntax, signal/semantics), the Peircean semiotic is triadic (sign, object, interpretant), being conceived as philosophical logic studied in terms of signs that are not always linguistic or artificial. The Peircean semiotic addresses not only the external communication mechanism, as per Saussure, but the internal representation machine, investigating not just sign processes, or modes of inference, but the whole inquiry process in general. Peircean semiotics further subdivides each of the three triadic elements into three sub-types. For example, signs can be icons, indices, and symbols.


                          Happy deciphering:
                          http://www.paulburgess.org/triadic.html

                          He also thought that everything is a sign. This would be the position of pansemiosis.



                          Agreeable that would-could have some objectionable consequences. However that is, the further differentiation between signal/signaling could eliminate that or at least diminish its appearing consequences, leaving the object variable and diffusable.
                          Black Sun
                          Meno_
                          Philosopher
                           
                          Posts: 3262
                          Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2015 2:39 am
                          Location: Mysterium Tremendum

                          Re: Reality vs Perception

                          Postby encode_decode » Fri Feb 23, 2018 4:42 pm

                            Meno_

                            I have briefly gone over what both Magnus and yourself have written and I will study the material that Magnus has suggested.

                            I will be back.

                            :D
                              Neosophi | HOME | FORUM

                              Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony
                              (James S Saint)


                              It’s not that truth itself is being eroded per se, it’s that fragmental falsification appears to be increasing.
                              (Anomaly654)


                              Mind is an ever changing dimension that is bound to reality, logic and emotion.
                              (Myself)
                              User avatar
                              encode_decode
                              Philosopher
                               
                              Posts: 1177
                              Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 4:07 pm

                              Re: Reality vs Perception

                              Postby Meno_ » Fri Feb 23, 2018 5:04 pm

                              encode_decode wrote:
                                Meno_

                                I have briefly gone over what both Magnus and yourself have written and I will study the material that Magnus has suggested.

                                I will be back.

                                :D


                                I appreciate that.
                                Black Sun
                                Meno_
                                Philosopher
                                 
                                Posts: 3262
                                Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2015 2:39 am
                                Location: Mysterium Tremendum

                                Re: Reality vs Perception

                                Postby encode_decode » Fri Feb 23, 2018 8:41 pm

                                  Meno_

                                  Here I continue where I left off that if intelligence is a reduction of information entropy then conscious apprehension and subconscious processing is the means of putting these fragments of information back together. Also, I feel I must say that this interaction has been very valuable to me. A thought just occurred to me that the mere event of conscious apprehension must be fairly complex and carry with it, it's own level of entropy - a probability that the apprehension will not take place.

                                  Meno_ wrote:Such a reconstruction must follow the probable type of the deconstructed 'original' or becomes virtually bound more to probable formal arranged centers of operation, which adhere tacitly(Polanyi) to embedded ones, with it's structural patterns of mathematical notation.

                                  Yes, this reminds me of the convergence that Eddington was talking about. An exception is made that we are dealing with probable types as opposed to absolute types - probable types of convergence leading to unity. The formal arranged centers of operation/s do adhere tacitly to embedded ones and the structural patterns are built up over consecutive generations - very slowly compared to surroundings. Generations need not be associated with human evolution.

                                  Generations can each be attempts at understanding. Or in fact attempts at explanation. Each generation likely becoming clearer.

                                  To illustrate: even if we are talking about two different things, there is a probability that {understanding/(an understanding)} will take place. Where there is less understanding there is more entropy of information - tacitly there are two probabilities >> the first is that there is information >> the second is that there is some understanding - bringing us back to what I said before about the somewhat correct and the somewhat incorrect - one might need to take a leap of faith here for the time being.

                                  Meno_ wrote:This is merely a derivation more from more general or hidden particulars for processing more identifiable patterns.

                                  What is more general or hidden can point at truths that identifiable patterns expose.

                                  Meno_ wrote:I must excuse myself for this intuitive approach related to philosophical underpinnings , whereas it may have relevance as well to mathematical abstraction.

                                  If we are to watch the droplets fly away from a water sprinkler and observe their paths and impacts we are able to determine their source, yet their final destination is somewhat entropic in that they are now scattered but perhaps this does not capture properly what I am talking about because this principle is working in the reverse of information entropy - their final placement is actually ordered.

                                  Meno_ wrote:I agree with St. James that reality consists of precepts of posited bits but such position is not some juxtaposition of formal and substantial elements, but of interaction between them, not as some form of transcendent. Although a precept appears as priority, it is only by conventional meaning does it appears as such.

                                  Hmm, I will put further thought into this.

                                  Meno_ wrote:Reality vs perception is not a prioritization of the shift from a deductive logical sequencing of meaning bits to an inductive ones, since modeling reconstructs reality through changeless bits of information which are brought together by the most probable patterns toward saturation of redundant bits.

                                  I understand where you are coming from and a response from me would be dependent on further thought as previously mentioned.
                                    Neosophi | HOME | FORUM

                                    Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony
                                    (James S Saint)


                                    It’s not that truth itself is being eroded per se, it’s that fragmental falsification appears to be increasing.
                                    (Anomaly654)


                                    Mind is an ever changing dimension that is bound to reality, logic and emotion.
                                    (Myself)
                                    User avatar
                                    encode_decode
                                    Philosopher
                                     
                                    Posts: 1177
                                    Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 4:07 pm

                                    Re: Reality vs Perception

                                    Postby Meno_ » Fri Feb 23, 2018 9:46 pm

                                    High again, encode

                                    I think that has been clarified to an extent sufficient to our purposes. (As far as. I can gather) at least as far as I can see.

                                    Thank You. (for now)
                                    Black Sun
                                    Meno_
                                    Philosopher
                                     
                                    Posts: 3262
                                    Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2015 2:39 am
                                    Location: Mysterium Tremendum

                                    Re: Reality vs Perception

                                    Postby encode_decode » Fri Feb 23, 2018 10:02 pm

                                    Meno_ wrote:High again.

                                    I think that has been clarified to an extent sufficient to our purposes. (As far as. I can gather) Thanks

                                    I knew you were going to say that - I had already composed that post prior to the comments that Magnus and yourself last made and was not going to post it but I do read back over these threads when I come to composing/writing up material for my website so I thought I had better conclude with it.

                                    Sorry about the ambiguity.

                                    :D
                                      Neosophi | HOME | FORUM

                                      Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony
                                      (James S Saint)


                                      It’s not that truth itself is being eroded per se, it’s that fragmental falsification appears to be increasing.
                                      (Anomaly654)


                                      Mind is an ever changing dimension that is bound to reality, logic and emotion.
                                      (Myself)
                                      User avatar
                                      encode_decode
                                      Philosopher
                                       
                                      Posts: 1177
                                      Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 4:07 pm

                                      PreviousNext

                                      Return to Philosophy



                                      Who is online

                                      Users browsing this forum: No registered users