- Thank you received: 0
My pareidolia knows no bounds.
- Larry Burford
- Offline
- Platinum Member
Less
More
10 years 10 months ago #21506
by Larry Burford
Replied by Larry Burford on topic Reply from Larry Burford
Anytime you use 'the word'(rev 1), even indirectly as I have just done, you should parenthetically specify which definition you are using.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Larry Burford
- Offline
- Platinum Member
Less
More
- Thank you received: 0
10 years 10 months ago #15121
by Larry Burford
Replied by Larry Burford on topic Reply from Larry Burford
BTW, I see no significant difference between these definitions. Does anyone?
LB
LB
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Larry Burford
- Offline
- Platinum Member
Less
More
- Thank you received: 0
10 years 10 months ago #21507
by Larry Burford
Replied by Larry Burford on topic Reply from Larry Burford
Also, I'm wondering if anyone will post a version or versions of the definition that launched us along this trajectory?
Hello? Zip? You are still welcome here.
Hello? Zip? You are still welcome here.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Larry Burford
- Offline
- Platinum Member
Less
More
- Thank you received: 0
10 years 10 months ago #24212
by Larry Burford
Replied by Larry Burford on topic Reply from Larry Burford
Pareidolia(rev 1, but also by any other - even unofficial - definition I am aware of) seems to me to be a specific case of the larger phenomenon of pattern recognition error in wetware computational systems. It probably also can/does happen in computational systems based on other construction techniques, but I have not studied that area.
An anecdote - some years ago I entered a room that was dark except for moonlight coming in a window. The drapes were partially covering the window, and the drapes were semi sheer, and they had a number of folds. So the patch of moonlight on the floor was a quite intricate pattern of light and shadow of varying degrees of brightness and density.
And, I first saw this patch of light out of the corner of an eye. My mind/brain instantly (as in really fast) provided me with a positive identification of the object over there in the corner. It was a spider about two or three feet in diameter. And not just a 'sort of vague' impression, either. The mind's eye image supplied by my pattern recognizer was 3D and very realistic.
But as soon as I turned to look directly at it, this 'positive ID' (and the accompanying adrenaline rush that was just beginning) gave way to reality. The ID changed, a little less rapidly now, to 'just semi-random light spots and shadow'. It did not look very much like a spider, and I could not rekindle that image even by looking at it from an eye-corner.
I remember understanding that I had just experienced an instinct-driven pattern-recognition-event that turned out to be erroneous. I smiled and went on about my business. But it took several minutes for that little pulse of adrenaline to be completely metabolized.
Kind of cool.
LB
An anecdote - some years ago I entered a room that was dark except for moonlight coming in a window. The drapes were partially covering the window, and the drapes were semi sheer, and they had a number of folds. So the patch of moonlight on the floor was a quite intricate pattern of light and shadow of varying degrees of brightness and density.
And, I first saw this patch of light out of the corner of an eye. My mind/brain instantly (as in really fast) provided me with a positive identification of the object over there in the corner. It was a spider about two or three feet in diameter. And not just a 'sort of vague' impression, either. The mind's eye image supplied by my pattern recognizer was 3D and very realistic.
But as soon as I turned to look directly at it, this 'positive ID' (and the accompanying adrenaline rush that was just beginning) gave way to reality. The ID changed, a little less rapidly now, to 'just semi-random light spots and shadow'. It did not look very much like a spider, and I could not rekindle that image even by looking at it from an eye-corner.
I remember understanding that I had just experienced an instinct-driven pattern-recognition-event that turned out to be erroneous. I smiled and went on about my business. But it took several minutes for that little pulse of adrenaline to be completely metabolized.
Kind of cool.
LB
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- pareidoliac
- Offline
- Elite Member
Less
More
- Thank you received: 0
10 years 10 months ago #21508
by pareidoliac
Replied by pareidoliac on topic Reply from fred ressler
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Larry Burford</i>
<br />BTW, I see no significant difference between these definitions. Does anyone?
LB
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
i see giant difference. Pareidolia (Rev 1) uses terms like "vague" and "random" "stimulus and response" "psycholigical" "apophenia" which accvording to wikipedia refers to "un-motivated seeing and abnormal meaningfulness." All this negativity does not match up to electromagnetic/ field/ gravitational "reality". All negatives are man made. Watch out next for who is to be blames and punished. (see Nietzsche).
Pareidolia (ressler) is couched in lay terms meaningful to everyone.
Most modern civilized people are trained from an early age to see in a logical/ linear/ 3D perspective/ militaristic/ Aristotelian type way. Many are fitted with eyeglasses removing natural images the brain is expecting to receive. Primitives have a different view including seeing pareidolia/ magic/ spirits/ reality/ telepathy etc. To imply as (Rev 1) does that natural real people are crazy for seeing pareidolia ( Rev 1) and we should all see militaristically and get with the war program. Might is not right and pareidolia (ressler) has value unrewarded and un-interested in by the church/state/military/industrial/educational/crime + crime fighting terrorist + anti terrorist system that takes 165 parts of each 166 parts that we produce and feeds this eternal pyramid ponzi system to nowhere till now.
<br />BTW, I see no significant difference between these definitions. Does anyone?
LB
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
i see giant difference. Pareidolia (Rev 1) uses terms like "vague" and "random" "stimulus and response" "psycholigical" "apophenia" which accvording to wikipedia refers to "un-motivated seeing and abnormal meaningfulness." All this negativity does not match up to electromagnetic/ field/ gravitational "reality". All negatives are man made. Watch out next for who is to be blames and punished. (see Nietzsche).
Pareidolia (ressler) is couched in lay terms meaningful to everyone.
Most modern civilized people are trained from an early age to see in a logical/ linear/ 3D perspective/ militaristic/ Aristotelian type way. Many are fitted with eyeglasses removing natural images the brain is expecting to receive. Primitives have a different view including seeing pareidolia/ magic/ spirits/ reality/ telepathy etc. To imply as (Rev 1) does that natural real people are crazy for seeing pareidolia ( Rev 1) and we should all see militaristically and get with the war program. Might is not right and pareidolia (ressler) has value unrewarded and un-interested in by the church/state/military/industrial/educational/crime + crime fighting terrorist + anti terrorist system that takes 165 parts of each 166 parts that we produce and feeds this eternal pyramid ponzi system to nowhere till now.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Larry Burford
- Offline
- Platinum Member
Less
More
- Thank you received: 0
10 years 10 months ago #21580
by Larry Burford
Replied by Larry Burford on topic Reply from Larry Burford
<b>[pareidoliac] "Pareidolia (Rev 2) is ..."</b>
There is no definition named "rev 2". Do you perhaps mean the definition named "ressler"?
There is no definition named "rev 2". Do you perhaps mean the definition named "ressler"?
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Time to create page: 0.433 seconds