My pareidolia knows no bounds.

Hmmm ... if you post an image on facebook and you are asked to tag the faces that appear in the image, does that suggests that the patterns are real?

<b>[pareidoliac] "Larry. i wouldn't call the result 'erroneous.'"</b>


Fine, but I would. And do. Here is my thought trail.

When I look at the patterns in the tile on the floor of my den and see a face or a nude woman, I'm pretty sure that what I see is not actually a face or a nude woman. I am experiencing an erroneous pattern recognition event.

My recognizer says 'A', but I'm actually looking at 'B'. Note that this would be true even if I sincerely believed I was looking at 'A'.

Perhaps the word 'error' (and derivitives) also needs to be defined explicitly?

***

I wonder if the number of words we 'fight about' is small enough to make this explicit-defining-tactic a reasonably do-able thing? My intuition suggests the answer is no.

<b>LB: My recognizer says 'A', but I'm actually looking at 'B'. Note that this would be true even if I sincerely believed I was looking at 'A'.</b>

And there, my friends, is the problem with perception/consciousness: <i>WHO</i> determines which one is <i>REAL</i>?

(Hmmm ... define REAL please.)

Larry- the language straightening thing is doable and needs to be done. Remove man's negative concepts for a start. All can be stated positively. This is why i use other than us words like error, mistake, stupid, bad, wrong. In your example above i see it as you are correctly interpreting a pattern that is there as you see it. In the universe before man arrived negativity was non-existent. David Bohm and many others talk of our language (especially English) not matching up to reality. American language would be nice if it took negative English concepts for a start and give them back to England if they believe in that rot as they would say. The verb should dominate as opposed to the noun. I don't "walk into the room". The room "draws me into it". Eliminate conceptual ideas like time and space. No one has perceived yesterday or tomorrow or death or life for that matter. How about a language of light in accord with the universe.

<b>[shando] "WHO determines which one is REAL?"</b>

The physical universe is the final arbiter of this particular 'truth'. Here is my thought trail ...

Suppose A is a balloon on the ground, and B is a small balloon shaped boulder. (Yes, on the ground.) One simple way to pose the 'which' question to the physical universe is to kick the object in question. The harder you kick, the more likely you are to believe the answer.

LB