🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <27440@linus.UUCP> bwk@mbunix (Kort) writes:

>My map is real.  But my map is not the territory.  I believe my map, to
>the extent that I rely on it to navigate through the world.  But I also
>disbelieve my map, to the extent that I expect to find errors and
>inaccuracies that cause me to walk into walls now and then.

Very enjoyable article.  A lot of people forget that the map is just as real as
the territory.

In my view, the map may be *more* real than the territory, in that the
territory (new territory) is constantly being *inferred* from the existing
map, thus adding to the existing map and resulting in a revised map.  Many
people have pointed out that the only time when we are acutely aware that the
map is not the territory is when existing maps break down and need to be
replaced.  To paraphrase Nelson Goodman: worlds are made out of existing
worlds.  So the existing map is epistemologically *prior* to any future
territory that will be experienced by inference from an existing map.

It also seems possible that there is no territory -- only a gradually evolving
map.
-- 
"Absolute knowledge means never having to change your mind."

Sarge Gerbode
Institute for Research in Metapsychology
950 Guinda St.
Palo Alto, CA 94301
UUCP:  pyramid!thirdi!sarge