2 ms·
It's not at all a conflict. I am simply pointing out that where both of us observe/experience the pattern, your mind ascribes to it significance by relating it
by ukj 6y ago
It's not at all a conflict.
I am simply pointing out that where both of us observe/experience the pattern, your mind ascribes to it significance by relating it to the Mathematical construct called "Golden ratio".
My mind doesn't make that relation. I call that pattern (and other patterns like it) a "snail shell pattern".
We index the experience differently.
From your perspective a Mathematical expression describes the pattern.
From my perspective an English expression does.
- eyelidlessness 6y agoIt sounds like we understand it the same way, with different words.
- ukj 6y agoYou could say that. But then it begs the question "What does it mean to understand?" Either way, we index the pattern in our respective minds. You index (understand?) it as a "Golden ratio". I index (understand?) it as a "snail shell". Your understanding it Mathematically, I do not. Which is why I said that you assign Mathematical meaning to the pattern. This is essentially what Linguistic relativism is all about: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linguistic_relativity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linguistic_relativity
- eyelidlessness 6y ago> You index (understand?) it as a "Golden ratio". > I index (understand?) it as a "snail shell". > Your understanding it Mathematically, I do not. Which is why I said that you assign Mathematical meaning to the pattern. Huh? I spoke of snail shells. If your characterization were accurate we probably wouldn’t even know we’re talking about the same thing.
- ukj 6y agoThese were your words: "a snail’s shell expresses it (the golden ratio)" You connected the dots between the two...