To: Jonathan
From: Roger
Re: Random Patterns
Jonathan, I basically agree and find value with everything you wrote. The
term 'objective' is prone to causing problems in any discussion of the MOQ.
You know the strangest thing? I've been thinking about Donny too. He used to
write about philosophy as the pursuit of questions, and it reminded me of our
exchanges on this issue. In fact, I originally referenced Donny in my first
draft of yesterday's post, but then deleted it. When you then mentioned him
too, without any knowledge that I was thinking of him, I was amazed.
Anyways, below is my revamped and reordered summary of this topic on the
nature of patterns and randomness and their correlation to reality and
models. I believe I have incorporated all your suggestions, and I have
removed the 'o' word completely.
"Randomness and pattern can each be considered properties of a model of
reality. The difference between the random and non-random viewpoint is one of
quality. A logically consistent model of reality that simplifies, and that
identifies patterns correlating with the features being modeled, is of higher
quality than an unpatterned, random model."
Do you agree with this version?
Anyone else out there have any input? Come on, the nature of patterns is a
fascinating issue that is central to the MOQ. Surely others of you have some
additional insights or differing interpretations?
Roger
PS -- I am hoping to do a final installment on this topic that delves into
entropy, time and the emergence of complexity.
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
