[MD] inorganic patterns & thinking

[MarshaV]

On Jul 18, 2010, at 7:34 PM, craigerb at comcast.net wrote:

> [Craig, previously]
>> Take Pluto.  It was "down-graded" from a planet. If you think that thereby reality changed,
>> you see a relationship [between patterns & thinking], if you think it didn't, you don't.
> 
> .
> [Marsha]
>> The Pluto pattern doesn't exist without some relationship to 
>> thinking.  Does it?  
> 
> Craig:
> IMHO Pluto's patterns are constituted by its interactions with other patterns. When the platypus
> was discovered people argued over whether it was a furry reptile, an egg-laying mammal or even
> possible. But the platypus went on its merry way. So too Pluto's interaction with the sun &
> other planets is more significant than its interaction with our thinking. Though there must be some|
> possible interaction, however indirect, between Pluto & us, for Pluto to be real.

Marsha:
Pluto is real if man measures it to be real, and if man measures a muon to be real it becomes real. 
It seems to me thinking has a relationship within that measuring process all the way down.   


 
___