Jonathan B. Marder (marder@agri.huji.ac.il)
Fri, 29 May 1998 02:22:19 +0100
-----Original Message-----
From: Fintan Dunne <findunne@iol.ie>
To: Multiple recipients of <lilasqd@mail.hkg.com>
Date: Wednesday, May 27, 1998 5:14 AM
Subject: LS Re: Explain the Subject/Object Metaphysics
[snip]
>In fact, S and O are the SAME substance: Pattern
>
> Objects are- Pattern as Pattern
> Subjects are- Pattern as Pattern Recognition Algorithm.(PRA)
[snip]
I previously welcomed this formulation from Fintan - in fact this is
what Pirsig also says. The definition of Subject as a PRA seems good to
me.
However, I now want to take issue with the definition of Object as a
pattern. Suppose I look into the bottom of my teacup and find what looks
like the image of a monkey (Happens all the time with shiny-bottom
cups!). Does that mean that the tea leaves are arranged not randomly,
but in a pattern? This is the dilemma of quantum mechanics. Expected
data has a probability before it is recorded and a certainty after!
Similarly, the tea-leaves are randomly arranged, until I look and find
this not to be so.
So where is the pattern?
If it is in the object, then there is no randomness. Pattern means
non-random.
Is the pattern in my mind? Well I have a perception of the pattern, but
is it the pattern itself?
The pattern seems to me to be Quality itself!!!!!!!!!!!! It is neither
subject nor object. It is in the observation. Furthermore, without the
observation, we have no basis for an object-subject split. The
observation creates the SO split.
Thus:-
Object - things/events which might be observed
Subject- pattern-matching algorithm
The pattern itself is in the observation.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Thu May 13 1999 - 16:43:15 CEST