The Paradox of Observation

Known unknowns and unknown unknowns!

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Eodnhoj7
Posts: 8595
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

The Paradox of Observation

Post by Eodnhoj7 »

The more something is observed the more complex it becomes. The more complex it becomes the less sense it makes because not all of it can sensed. The deeper something is sensed the less it is sensed.
Age
Posts: 20043
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: The Paradox of Observation

Post by Age »

Eodnhoj7 wrote: Sat Jun 03, 2023 11:37 pm The more something is observed the more complex it becomes. The more complex it becomes the less sense it makes because not all of it can sensed. The deeper something is sensed the less it is sensed.
So, according to "eodhnoj7",

The more the tying of a shoelace is observed, for example, then the more complex the tying of a shoelace becomes.

And, the more complex the tying of a shoelace becomes, then the less sense tying of a shoelace makes. Because not all of the (VERY SIMPLE) process of tying a shoelace can be sensed.

Therefore, and, the deeper the tying of a shoelace is sensed, then the less tying of a shoelace is sensed.

Again, ONLY according to "eodnhoj7's" logic anyway.

BUT, for the rest of 'us' the absolute RIDICULOUSNESS of "eodnhoj7:s“ claims here speak for themselves.
Iwannaplato
Posts: 6591
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 10:55 pm

Re: The Paradox of Observation

Post by Iwannaplato »

Eodnhoj7 wrote: Sat Jun 03, 2023 11:37 pm The more something is observed the more complex it becomes. The more complex it becomes the less sense it makes because not all of it can sensed. The deeper something is sensed the less it is sensed.
There are two senses of 'sense' here.

I do experience the phenomenon you are talking about here. If one allows oneself to rather than simply register something as a kind of shorthand whole, one keeps noticing and experience into the details of the thing, all these details are harder to clump together in the simple way we might think of tree or stone.

But there's no paradox. You've sensed more of the thing. And if you want that more detailed impression or knowledge of the thing, well, you got it.

There's a contrast between different types of noticing/seeing. Oftne all we need to know, say when driving, is that there is someone to the right on a bike. That's it. We don't want to kill them, we need to have some sense of what they might do. The colors of their shirt are seen but often not noticed. Their race, if they have tattoos on their arms, shorts or boxer shorts, brand of bike, and so on, does not matter. We've checked a broad box. We've got the necessary category: person on bike riding to our right, coming up. And that's all we want or need. Closing our eyes later and remembering we might be able to pull out more details which we saw but did not really notice.

OR we come to a red light. They are now also stopped to our right and we now look more intensely. We notice all sorts of details. Get a more complicated and detailed set of impressions. Perhaps we are attracted to the bike rider, so we are assessing and checking everything. We now have more impressions and details that we are not only seeing but noticing. This 'getting to know more' creates a batch of information that may be hard to sum up. But it is not less sensed.
Veritas Aequitas
Posts: 12242
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2012 4:41 am

Re: The Paradox of Observation

Post by Veritas Aequitas »

Eodnhoj7 wrote: Sat Jun 03, 2023 11:37 pm The more something is observed the more complex it becomes. The more complex it becomes the less sense it makes because not all of it can sensed. The deeper something is sensed the less it is sensed.
It is not a real paradox, you are conflating the various senses of 'sense'.

The more something is observed [one of the biological senses - the visual] the more complex it becomes
The more complex it becomes the less sense it makes [being understood - intellect] because not all of it can sensed [biologically].
The deeper something is sensed [to be understood] the less it is sensed [by the sense organ].

This is a very common scenario with many subjects.
Example in Physics and the physical.
The deeper we observed [visual senses] from the world of solids to the world of molecules, atoms, electron, particles and quarks, the more complex it is be understood [sensed -intellectually].
Iwannaplato
Posts: 6591
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 10:55 pm

Re: The Paradox of Observation

Post by Iwannaplato »

Veritas Aequitas wrote: Fri Jun 16, 2023 9:26 am It is not a real paradox, you are conflating the various senses of 'sense'.
Ah, it can happen. Complete agreement....
me above,
There are two senses of 'sense' here.
Impenitent
Posts: 4305
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 2:04 pm

Re: The Paradox of Observation

Post by Impenitent »

Eodnhoj7 wrote: Sat Jun 03, 2023 11:37 pm The more something is observed the more complex it becomes. The more complex it becomes the less sense it makes because not all of it can sensed. The deeper something is sensed the less it is sensed.
observations exist momentarily ...

submarine sensations are often brilliant

-Imp
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 8595
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: The Paradox of Observation

Post by Eodnhoj7 »

Age wrote: Tue Jun 13, 2023 11:17 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Sat Jun 03, 2023 11:37 pm The more something is observed the more complex it becomes. The more complex it becomes the less sense it makes because not all of it can sensed. The deeper something is sensed the less it is sensed.
So, according to "eodhnoj7",

The more the tying of a shoelace is observed, for example, then the more complex the tying of a shoelace becomes.

And, the more complex the tying of a shoelace becomes, then the less sense tying of a shoelace makes. Because not all of the (VERY SIMPLE) process of tying a shoelace can be sensed.

Therefore, and, the deeper the tying of a shoelace is sensed, then the less tying of a shoelace is sensed.

Again, ONLY according to "eodnhoj7's" logic anyway.

BUT, for the rest of 'us' the absolute RIDICULOUSNESS of "eodnhoj7:s“ claims here speak for themselves.
The more you pay attention to tying a shoelace the more you are aware of the intricacies of it and the more you pay attention to the intricacies the harder it becomes because you over think it.

To do it without thinking results in simplicity.
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 8595
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: The Paradox of Observation

Post by Eodnhoj7 »

Iwannaplato wrote: Tue Jun 13, 2023 1:58 pm
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Sat Jun 03, 2023 11:37 pm The more something is observed the more complex it becomes. The more complex it becomes the less sense it makes because not all of it can sensed. The deeper something is sensed the less it is sensed.
There are two senses of 'sense' here.

I do experience the phenomenon you are talking about here. If one allows oneself to rather than simply register something as a kind of shorthand whole, one keeps noticing and experience into the details of the thing, all these details are harder to clump together in the simple way we might think of tree or stone.

But there's no paradox. You've sensed more of the thing. And if you want that more detailed impression or knowledge of the thing, well, you got it.

There's a contrast between different types of noticing/seeing. Oftne all we need to know, say when driving, is that there is someone to the right on a bike. That's it. We don't want to kill them, we need to have some sense of what they might do. The colors of their shirt are seen but often not noticed. Their race, if they have tattoos on their arms, shorts or boxer shorts, brand of bike, and so on, does not matter. We've checked a broad box. We've got the necessary category: person on bike riding to our right, coming up. And that's all we want or need. Closing our eyes later and remembering we might be able to pull out more details which we saw but did not really notice.

OR we come to a red light. They are now also stopped to our right and we now look more intensely. We notice all sorts of details. Get a more complicated and detailed set of impressions. Perhaps we are attracted to the bike rider, so we are assessing and checking everything. We now have more impressions and details that we are not only seeing but noticing. This 'getting to know more' creates a batch of information that may be hard to sum up. But it is not less sensed.
If there can be 'sensed' multiple meanings to "sense" then one sense stands apart from another and we result in contradiction.

If the deeper something is sensed results in the observation that there are intricacies to it that cannot be sensed, as there is far to much to know and remember, then I am sensing my sense is limited and this limit to my senses only point to an absence in them. The paradox is that I am sensing non-sense; I am sensing my absence of sense.
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 8595
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: The Paradox of Observation

Post by Eodnhoj7 »

Veritas Aequitas wrote: Fri Jun 16, 2023 9:26 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Sat Jun 03, 2023 11:37 pm The more something is observed the more complex it becomes. The more complex it becomes the less sense it makes because not all of it can sensed. The deeper something is sensed the less it is sensed.
It is not a real paradox, you are conflating the various senses of 'sense'.

The more something is observed [one of the biological senses - the visual] the more complex it becomes
The more complex it becomes the less sense it makes [being understood - intellect] because not all of it can sensed [biologically].
The deeper something is sensed [to be understood] the less it is sensed [by the sense organ].

This is a very common scenario with many subjects.
Example in Physics and the physical.
The deeper we observed [visual senses] from the world of solids to the world of molecules, atoms, electron, particles and quarks, the more complex it is be understood [sensed -intellectually].
To repeat myself:

"If there can be 'sensed' multiple meanings to "sense" then one sense stands apart from another and we result in contradiction.

If the deeper something is sensed results in the observation that there are intricacies to it that cannot be sensed, as there is far to much to know and remember, then I am sensing my sense is limited and this limit to my senses only point to an absence in them. The paradox is that I am sensing non-sense; I am sensing my absence of sense."

However the fact that various meanings of the term "sense" can be conflated only points to an underlying universal definition as to what sense is because of said connections. If these meanings of "sense" cannot or should not be conflated, as there are multiple opposing definitions, then in what
sense do you mean sense when you state I am conflating definitions?

And to another point. With greater complexity comes more questions and with more questions a deeper absence of what we know as a question primarily occurs when we do not know something.
Iwannaplato
Posts: 6591
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 10:55 pm

Re: The Paradox of Observation

Post by Iwannaplato »

Eodnhoj7 wrote: Wed Jun 21, 2023 7:49 pm If there can be 'sensed' multiple meanings to "sense" then one sense stands apart from another and we result in contradiction.
Nope, because language always depends on contexts, not just individual words.
If the deeper something is sensed results in the observation that there are intricacies to it that cannot be sensed, as there is far to much to know and remember, then I am sensing my sense is limited and this limit to my senses only point to an absence in them. The paradox is that I am sensing non-sense; I am sensing my absence of sense.
Well, you may well be having that experience, but you are universalizing it. Other people are not lacking sense.
Age
Posts: 20043
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: The Paradox of Observation

Post by Age »

Eodnhoj7 wrote: Wed Jun 21, 2023 7:45 pm
Age wrote: Tue Jun 13, 2023 11:17 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Sat Jun 03, 2023 11:37 pm The more something is observed the more complex it becomes. The more complex it becomes the less sense it makes because not all of it can sensed. The deeper something is sensed the less it is sensed.
So, according to "eodhnoj7",

The more the tying of a shoelace is observed, for example, then the more complex the tying of a shoelace becomes.

And, the more complex the tying of a shoelace becomes, then the less sense tying of a shoelace makes. Because not all of the (VERY SIMPLE) process of tying a shoelace can be sensed.

Therefore, and, the deeper the tying of a shoelace is sensed, then the less tying of a shoelace is sensed.

Again, ONLY according to "eodnhoj7's" logic anyway.

BUT, for the rest of 'us' the absolute RIDICULOUSNESS of "eodnhoj7:s“ claims here speak for themselves.
The more you pay attention to tying a shoelace the more you are aware of the intricacies of it and the more you pay attention to the intricacies the harder it becomes because you over think it.
Is what you DO, what you THINK absolutely EVERY one "ELSE" DOES, ALSO?

And, could you be OVER 'thinking' 'things' here?

Also, how do you KNOW when you have OVER 'thought' some 'thing'?
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Wed Jun 21, 2023 7:45 pm To do it without thinking results in simplicity.
If you SAY SO.
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 8595
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: The Paradox of Observation

Post by Eodnhoj7 »

Iwannaplato wrote: Wed Jun 21, 2023 9:18 pm
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Wed Jun 21, 2023 7:49 pm If there can be 'sensed' multiple meanings to "sense" then one sense stands apart from another and we result in contradiction.
Nope, because language always depends on contexts, not just individual words.
If the deeper something is sensed results in the observation that there are intricacies to it that cannot be sensed, as there is far to much to know and remember, then I am sensing my sense is limited and this limit to my senses only point to an absence in them. The paradox is that I am sensing non-sense; I am sensing my absence of sense.
Well, you may well be having that experience, but you are universalizing it. Other people are not lacking sense.
Language is context as it is the observation of boundaries, the fact that one word can have multiple meanings dependent upon context necessitates that one word can stand apart from itself in definition.

As to the rest:

1. And one context stands apart from another. Under one context there is no contradiction. An example of this is it is snowing in Pennsylvania. Under multiple contexts there is a contradiction. An example of this is it is snowing in Pennsylvania but not Hawaii. Yes it is snowing in Pennsylvania but it is not snowing in Hawaii and one context stands apart from another thus the meaning of "it snowing" stands apart from itself, it is divided. However if I expand the context even further, and universalize it, we can still end in contradiction: it is both snowing and not snowing on earth.

Expand the context, either by multiplying it or generalizing it, and contradiction occurs.

However the above can be observed as mute. Under the context of the argument the multiple meanings of sense, if there really are any as that is relative to the context of who observes it, equate to one. In observing, or "sensing" in this case, that there are limits to my observation, or "sense", I am observing that I am not observing things thus observation relies upon its dualistic opposite of no-observation (non-sense). I sense my absence of sense.

2. If other people are not lacking sense then you are saying that there are people who know everything...which we know is not true. You contradict yourself.
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 8595
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: The Paradox of Observation

Post by Eodnhoj7 »

Age wrote: Thu Jun 22, 2023 7:46 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Wed Jun 21, 2023 7:45 pm
Age wrote: Tue Jun 13, 2023 11:17 am

So, according to "eodhnoj7",

The more the tying of a shoelace is observed, for example, then the more complex the tying of a shoelace becomes.

And, the more complex the tying of a shoelace becomes, then the less sense tying of a shoelace makes. Because not all of the (VERY SIMPLE) process of tying a shoelace can be sensed.

Therefore, and, the deeper the tying of a shoelace is sensed, then the less tying of a shoelace is sensed.

Again, ONLY according to "eodnhoj7's" logic anyway.

BUT, for the rest of 'us' the absolute RIDICULOUSNESS of "eodnhoj7:s“ claims here speak for themselves.
The more you pay attention to tying a shoelace the more you are aware of the intricacies of it and the more you pay attention to the intricacies the harder it becomes because you over think it.
Is what you DO, what you THINK absolutely EVERY one "ELSE" DOES, ALSO?

And, could you be OVER 'thinking' 'things' here?

Also, how do you KNOW when you have OVER 'thought' some 'thing'?
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Wed Jun 21, 2023 7:45 pm To do it without thinking results in simplicity.
If you SAY SO.
Are you sure these are the right questions to ask if everyone is connected as one? If all is one then the problems of others are share by everyone.
Age
Posts: 20043
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: The Paradox of Observation

Post by Age »

Eodnhoj7 wrote: Fri Jun 23, 2023 7:08 pm
Age wrote: Thu Jun 22, 2023 7:46 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Wed Jun 21, 2023 7:45 pm

The more you pay attention to tying a shoelace the more you are aware of the intricacies of it and the more you pay attention to the intricacies the harder it becomes because you over think it.
Is what you DO, what you THINK absolutely EVERY one "ELSE" DOES, ALSO?

And, could you be OVER 'thinking' 'things' here?

Also, how do you KNOW when you have OVER 'thought' some 'thing'?
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Wed Jun 21, 2023 7:45 pm To do it without thinking results in simplicity.
If you SAY SO.
Are you sure these are the right questions to ask if everyone is connected as one?
I was NOT aware that there even could be right and wrong questions, to ask.

Are you sure there are right, and wrong, questions, to ask?

If yes, then what is the 'rightness' and 'wrongness’ here judged upon and from, EXACTLY?
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Fri Jun 23, 2023 7:08 pm If all is one then the problems of others are share by everyone.
I suppose you could argue for this, that is if the word 'others' would even apply here, but which it would obviously NOT. See, if all is one, then there are NO 'others'.
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 8595
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: The Paradox of Observation

Post by Eodnhoj7 »

Age wrote: Sun Jun 25, 2023 2:33 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Fri Jun 23, 2023 7:08 pm
Age wrote: Thu Jun 22, 2023 7:46 am

Is what you DO, what you THINK absolutely EVERY one "ELSE" DOES, ALSO?

And, could you be OVER 'thinking' 'things' here?

Also, how do you KNOW when you have OVER 'thought' some 'thing'?


If you SAY SO.
Are you sure these are the right questions to ask if everyone is connected as one?
I was NOT aware that there even could be right and wrong questions, to ask.

Are you sure there are right, and wrong, questions, to ask?

If yes, then what is the 'rightness' and 'wrongness’ here judged upon and from, EXACTLY?
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Fri Jun 23, 2023 7:08 pm If all is one then the problems of others are share by everyone.
I suppose you could argue for this, that is if the word 'others' would even apply here, but which it would obviously NOT. See, if all is one, then there are NO 'others'.
Are you sure if there is a right and wrong? If there is then the question of "is this the right question to ask?" stands. If not then I am not wrong in what I state.
Post Reply