Daily Dialectic

The moon is a real pattern: we can make real predictions of its behaviour. My glasses are likewise a real pattern. My glasses and the moon taken together, however, are not a real pattern: the features included in such a pattern do not usefully predict the behaviour of this fandangled thing. So, real patterns are ‘real’ by virtue of being useful for the projection of some dynamic. However, dynamics are individuated in virtue of the things they affect, and the things in question are… other real patterns!

Thus, in our search for real patterns we find ourselves going on a walk that is not exactly a circle, but is at least in the shape of a closed curve in space. Proponents of real patterns throw in a few other bits and pieces that purportedly deal with this - usually to do with the special sciences. However, I will argue that that is not enough. I will argue that we need two more crucial ingredients - bias and relevance - for real patterns to do the work their proponents want them to do.