OK, that gives me a partial grasp. Can you give me an example?
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 7:05 PM, Jim Bromer <[email protected]> wrote: > Conceptual relativism is the idea that concepts must be used to think > about other concepts and when that happens the concepts that are used in an > expression or study of the subject concept can often affect the "meaning" > of the subject concept. So concepts are not only relative and relational > they are also relativistic. > > Incidentally, a pattern does describe a pattern. Most typically, a > pattern is composed of other patterns. (And it is pretty hard to imagine a > pattern that isn't composed of other patterns. I guess you could define a > simplest form of pattern or something.) Just about all interesting patterns > are composed of patterns. > Jim Bromer > > On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 7:57 PM, Aaron Hosford <[email protected]>wrote: > >> I wouldn't argue that a meta pattern isn't itself a pattern. It's just a >> special kind of pattern that describes patterns instead of other sorts of >> things. Kind of like a type in programming can itself be a type. That >> doesn't diminish the distinctness of the two concepts to me, though. >> >> Could you define conceptual relativism for me? I'm new to this list, and >> haven't heard the term used outside of it. >> >> On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 6:42 PM, Jim Bromer <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 11:17 AM, [email protected] < >>> [email protected]> wrote: >>> You lost me on why that would make it any harder to define the >>> difference between patterns and metapatterns. A pattern is a constraint >>> applied to a set of things which is expressed as a description of those >>> things' parts/structure. As such, patterns themselves can be placed in a >>> set constrained by their own parts/structure, creating a metapattern which >>> acts as a category over those patterns >>> ------------------------------ >>> Well to be honest, I was thinking of the difference between a pattern >>> generator and a meta-pattern generator when I said that. However the same >>> thing applies to a pattern and a meta pattern. If "a meta pattern" is the >>> category over "some patterns" then the two concepts can be distinguished if >>> the relation is so defined (or a conclusion is constrained by the original >>> definition of things). However, I believe that concepts are relativistic >>> and in this case there are some problems with the definition when using it >>> as a method of recognition. A meta-pattern is a pattern (according to the >>> traditional way of thinking about meta-things) and therefore, by >>> definition, we find that such things have to be classified as patterns. >>> >>> While you can define the distinction (as in a declaration of a given >>> definition) that does not mean that it would be so easy to give a clear >>> definition of the thing when you saw it. >>> >>> For example, you can think of a dynamic system like an amazing fireworks >>> display in which the first pattern spawns a second pattern which spawns the >>> first pattern over again. Although this definition is a little stretched, >>> there are more important systems in computer science (which I can not >>> clearly think of at this time but which are very relevant to the problem of >>> AGI.) >>> >>> Conceptual relativism is serious stuff. >>> Jim Bromer >>> >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 11:17 AM, [email protected] < >>> [email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> You lost me on why that would make it any harder to define the >>>> difference between patterns and metapatterns. A pattern is a constraint >>>> applied to a set of things which is expressed as a description of those >>>> things' parts/structure. As such, patterns themselves can be placed in a >>>> set constrained by their own parts/structure, creating a metapattern which >>>> acts as a category over those patterns. It's the difference between a set >>>> of sets and the union of those same sets. Or if you want a different >>>> analogy, it's the difference between a group of regular expressions which >>>> match against strings, and a regular expression which matches strings that >>>> fit the syntax of regular expressions. But fundamentally, the reason this >>>> conversation is so complicated is the mixing of levels between description >>>> & described. You are both trying to describe what a description or pattern >>>> is. What you say about a pattern or description is not that pattern or >>>> description itself. >>>> >>>> >>>> ------------------------------ >>>> On Aug 23, 2012 9:25 AM, Jim Bromer <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> Aaron, >>>> Thanks for helping me with a word. (Meta pattern). But we have been >>>> going through this kind of thing with Mike for years and years. He doesn't >>>> get it because he doesn't want to or can't. >>>> >>>> The elements that I mentioned were elements. The white color, for >>>> example, was clearly an element of the patterns. The fact that someone >>>> might think that a precise form like a particular triangle of the same size >>>> and shape had to be the finest definition of an element in some collection >>>> of patterns doesn't make it so. Yes we can agree on a definition of what >>>> qualifies as an element or we can agree to disagree, but my point is that >>>> the color white was an element that was common to every one of those >>>> designs and there is no equivocation around that. So the difference between >>>> the meta pattern and the pattern may not be so easy to define. >>>> Jim Bromer >>>> >>>> On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 9:55 AM, [email protected] < >>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Where the disagreement arises is that these two are talking about >>>>> different levels of representation. It's the difference between use ("a >>>>> dog" or "a pattern") and mention ("the word 'dog'" or "the pattern >>>>> 'pattern'"). Mike is insisting on a strictly use-based representation, >>>>> looking for common elements *between* the patterns, and Jim is failing to >>>>> point out the difference between elements and characteristics, the >>>>> characteristics of the different patterns being the elements of the >>>>> metapattern. >>>>> >>>>> -Aaron >>>>> >>>>> ------------------------------ >>>>> On Aug 23, 2012 7:38 AM, Ben Goertzel <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> If you want to put that mathematically, take a whole set of diverse >>>>>> patterns – Koch curve, Mandelbrot, herringbone, cellular automaton etc . >>>>>> etc. – and explain how the brain is able to abstract from *all of them >>>>>> together* and recognize them collectively as “patterns” (and not just as >>>>>> Koch curves/herringbones etc. etc). >>>>>> >>>>>> Where’s the pattern in a set of diverse patterns, B & B? And where’s >>>>>> the complexity, Jim? >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> that's easy, these are all obviously susceptible to lossy compression >>>>> using algorithms native to the brain... >>>>> >>>>> ben >>>>> >>>>> *AGI* | Archives <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now> >>>>> <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/10561250-164650b2> | >>>>> Modify <https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;> Your Subscription >>>>> <http://www.listbox.com> >>>>> >>>> >>>> *AGI* | Archives <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now> >>>> <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/23050605-e1815e61> | >>>> Modify <https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;> Your Subscription >>>> <http://www.listbox.com> >>>> *AGI* | Archives <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now> >>>> <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/10561250-164650b2> | >>>> Modify <https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;> Your Subscription >>>> <http://www.listbox.com> >>>> >>> >>> *AGI* | Archives <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now> >>> <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/23050605-bcb45fb4> | >>> Modify <https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;> Your Subscription >>> <http://www.listbox.com> >>> >> >> *AGI* | Archives <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now> >> <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/10561250-164650b2> | >> Modify <https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;> Your Subscription >> <http://www.listbox.com> >> > > *AGI* | Archives <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now> > <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/23050605-bcb45fb4> | > Modify<https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;>Your Subscription > <http://www.listbox.com> > ------------------------------------------- AGI Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/21088071-c97d2393 Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=21088071&id_secret=21088071-2484a968 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
