the territory is not the... 'er, map?
Current time: 11-21-2017, 12:51 AM
User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)
Author: eye2i2hear
Last Post: eye2i2hear
Replies: 1
Views: 1313

Post Reply 
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
the territory is not the... 'er, map?
08-22-2012, 10:50 AM
Post: #1
Lightbulb the territory is not the... 'er, map?
"the map is not the territory"...
in other words:
"belief is not reality"
"wishing doesn't make it so" ("imagining doesn't make it so"/"agreement doesn't make it reality")
"no description is perfectly accurate"
"be careful not to confuse levels of reference"

--from here

(for those with eyes 2hear here2) Cool

Is it voluntary? (because if it isn't, what inherently is it?)
And can it be voluntary, if there's indoctrination, intimidation, coercion, threats & initiation of violence?
[not to be confused with asking: can it be said to be "voluntary" even when such is present.?]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
08-02-2017, 10:15 AM (This post was last modified: 08-02-2017 10:21 AM by eye2i2hear.)
Post: #2
RE: the territory is not the... 'er, map?
Sailin' Capn' #reification #words #terms

casebash, over on LessWrong.com Wrote:
Map And Territory: Natural Structures

August 2017
This will be a very short post which simply defines one term which I find useful when discussing the map and the territory.

I find it very useful to have a term that helps clarify that the map is not completely arbitrary and that there are things in the territory that are natural candidates for appearing in the map. For example, for the Ship of Thesus, one natural candidate is the pure, original, unmodified ship; another are the fixed percentages (ie. 50% original); another would be a continuity based measure. If you are asked to create a definition of what counts as the Ship of Thesus, these are some of the first ideas that you would come up with, although you would of course need to define it in much, much more detail to get all the way down to the level of the territory.

Or suppose you are trying to define what is meant by table. Again, the definition is purely arbitrary and whatever you choose, but there are certain natural structures in reality that pop out at you. One might be all four-legged, non-living objects with a flat top, another might relax the four-legged requirement so that it only required four legs at one particular time, ect.

When I'm explaining that a particular concept has been reified, it greatly clarifies my position to explain that I don't believe that the concept is empty, but there is *something* behind it that leads us to want that word. That something is really not a single thing (or else it would be real, not reified), but a collection of closely related 'natural structures'. Each of the definitions provided for the Ship of Thesus or a table corresponds to a different natural structure, while the term itself appears in the map.
I hope you find this word useful too, but if you have any suggestions for a better term, please mention it in the comments.

user Dagon, via the Comments Wrote:I agree that there's something which draws us toward similar map structures. However, I'd avoid the word "natural" for describing this, as I suspect it's cultural or shared-experience rather than inherent in the territory. I therefore suspect that how one identifies "us" will result in very dissimilar map choices. There's likely to be much divergence between the categorization by ML models vs humans, and some variance between humans with wildly different cultural norms.

I might say "cultural shared expectations" as the thing you're trying to name.
edit: or maybe "comfortable map structures" or "focal structures"/"Schelling structures" (cf.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Focal_point_(game_theory) ).

summary: I think these structures are from similarity of mapmakers, rather than anything in the territory.

Two Thumbs Up ยน

--NonDEified2i

_________________________
1. tho i hafta admit, when the author speaks of "I hope you find this word useful too, but if you have any suggestions for a better term", i find pause on *what* that specific useful word is... "reified" perhaps is his referenced/intended term? (i don't think that negates the otherwise gleanable insights --obviously.?)

2. fwiw2, my hunch is that "ML" as used by Dagon is to signal "Machine Learning".?

Is it voluntary? (because if it isn't, what inherently is it?)
And can it be voluntary, if there's indoctrination, intimidation, coercion, threats & initiation of violence?
[not to be confused with asking: can it be said to be "voluntary" even when such is present.?]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 


Forum Jump:


User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)