PP26 $5,000 Challenge
G'day, my name is Bruce Robertson and this is Pirate Philosophy, the channel in which I describe the Pattern Paradigm, an original philosophy that is rigorous, logical and accurate. Welcome.
Regulars to this channel will have noticed that I have made some fairly bold and perhaps controversial claims with regard to the Pattern Paradigm philosophy. For I claim that it is rigorous, accurate and dynamic and that it constitutes a better framework for philosophy than any other philosophy currently available.
In today's video I am presenting a challenge.
In the video PP4 'What makes for a good philosophical paradigm?', I suggested some criteria that might be required for a good philosophy. I gave these criteria the acronym SCALES for Self consistency, Comprehensiveness, Accuracy, Logic, Explicitness and Simplicity.
In the video PP5 'How does standard Western philosophy stack up as a philosophy?' I gave standard Western philosophy a score of 3 1/2 out of 10 using those criteria. And in the video PP21 'How well does the Pattern Paradigm stack up as a philosophy?', I gave it a score of 7 1/2 out of 10.
Some might think that this is a fairly bold assertion. And perhaps it is, but now I am prepared to put my money where my mouth is and to offer a prize of $5000 to the first person who can identify a significant flaw in the Pattern Paradigm;and by significant flaw, I mean something that negates the validity of the Pattern Paradigm as a philosophy and negates the assertions that I have made. So a significant flaw would not include things like typos or inconsequential gaps in the framework; for while the Pattern Paradigm is comprehensive in its coverage of the major aspects of philosophy, it is far from being complete.
I will go over some criteria that could constitute a significant flaw later in this video.
A full description of the Pattern Paradigm is to be found in the series of videos on this channel from PP1 to PP25, though the main journey starts from PP7. Also there are transcripts of all these videos on my website thepatternparadigm.com.
The challenge will run for a year from the publication of this video on 13th of July 2023 or until such time as the prize is won, whichever comes sooner.
The prize is US$5000 and will be paid to the first person who identifies a significant or major flaw in the Pattern Paradigm. Submissions can be made on the front page of the website. I will put a link to the website in the description below. The length of the submission is not important, but I would expect it to be in the range of 500 to 5000 words. All that is required to claim the prize is a clear identification of a significant or major flaw and sufficient supporting material to show that it is indeed a significant flaw.
The submission must be in the English language as I am a philosopher but not a linguist.
The challenge is open to everyone from students to philosophy professors, from individuals to groups, from astronauts to housewives, from priests to plumbers, from people living in Mongolia to Sweden and everyone in-between.
The prize will be paid in any international currency to the value of US$5,000.
I will post any updates and progress made on the challenge in these videos and also on the website.
So now returning to some suggestions for where one might want to look to test the rigour of the Pattern Paradigm and to search for a flaw.
Some areas to look at could include:
Is the assumption that the workings of the brain can be modelled by a logical processor valid? This was discussed in PP7 'Preparations for a philosophical journey'.
Is it a valid claim that the only way that a concept can be generated by a logical processor is through a process of pattern identification of sense data? Or is there some other logical process by which this might be possible? This was discussed in the video PP9 'Patterns, time and space'.
Is the logical process of pattern identification as described in the identification algorithm in PP9, necessarily one of trial and error or is there some simpler deductive process by which a pattern can be extracted from a string of data?
Is it a valid suggestion that the pattern identification process can work in a recursive fashion using existing patterns as input and in this way create a pyramid of patterns and a model of the world? This was discussed in PP10 'Pyramids, patterns and why we sleep'.
Is it a valid claim that there is a particular goal to which the brain aspires and which is associated with the physical well-being of the entity?And does this aim underpin every decision that is made?This was discussed in the video PP11 'Foundations of reality and purpose' and also in PP13 'The logic of decision making'. In those videos I labelled this aim as 'happiness' as it is clearly associated with what is commonly termed as 'happiness'. Is this theory accurate?
Does the theory for the foundations of mathematics, as described in PP14 'The four components of mathematics' constitute an adequate account for the foundation of mathematics? Or is there some fatal flaw or inadequacy in it?
Is the claim that words are the labels for patterns and that the only use of language is for communication, even if it is only for communication with one self, accurate? Or do disembodied statement, that is statements disassociated from a transmitter and a receiver, have meaning that is independent of a human mind?
In the video PP19 'Is morality a good ethical system?, it was claimed that morals are no more than guidelines to assist people's decision making. Is this a sufficient description? Or do absolute moral truths actually exist?
Alternatively one could take an entirely different approach and claim that it is a significant flaw of the Pattern Paradigm that it does not include such things as the so-called 'laws of logic', nor an epistemology based on 'a priori' and 'a posteriori' concepts nor knowledge as 'justified, true, belief'? However if one were to take this approach one would need to prove that such things were necessary for every philosophy and that without them a philosophy would necessarily have a significant flaw. I suspect that this would be particularly hard to prove, but I am open to suggestions.
Or one could take another different approach and claim that The Pattern Paradigm is entirely inaccurate and does not fit the facts of the world and hence is more of a fantasy than a philosophy. Again I think this would be a hard thing to prove as I have described how many of the inferences that follow from the basic tenets of the Pattern Paradigm do fit with the facts of the world; as for example in the video PP22 'Nine uses of a good philosophy' But then again, I am open to suggestions.
Of course these are only suggestions for where significant flaws might be found. You may well have your own ideas of where to find a significant flaw.
And while we are on the topic of challenges, I would like to put forward another challenge, albeit this time with out any $5000 prize.
And this challenge is for proponents of other philosophies, those people who might consider their own philosophy to be superior to that of the Pattern Paradigm. The challenge is for them to do with their philosophy what I have done for the Pattern Paradigm; that is to summarise all its tenets, logic, assumptions and implications in 50,000 words or less and to put forward their own $5,000 prize to anyone who can find a significant flaw in it. And again a major flaw would most likely have to be along the lines of the previously mentioned SCALES criteria of Self consistency, Comprehensiveness, Accuracy, Logic, Explicitness and Simplicity. If someone or some people are able do this, then I would be happy to promote their challenge with links to it in my video channel and website.
I wish you all good luck in looking for and finding a significant flaw in the Pattern Paradigm and claiming the $5,000 prize.
For myself, of course, I doubt that this can be achieved as I have been working on this approach to philosophy for many years and I have not identified any significant flaws in it. But that said, anyone can make mistakes and overlook some important detail, so maybe indeed there are flaws to be found. And if there are, I would certainly like to know about them.
And should you examine the tenets and structure of the Pattern Paradigm and test its logic and accuracy but cannot find a flaw, I suggest that this exercise in itself would be sufficient reward.
And if in a year's time the $5000 prize has not been won and no proponent of a different philosophy has put forward a similar challenge, then I shall feel fully justified in my claim that the Pattern Paradigm is the best philosophy currently available.
Well, that is all I have for you today. I hope you have enjoyed this video and if you have any comments, please leave them in the section below. Next time, we will be re-commencing our philosophical journey into uncharted territories. And if you would like to continue this journey with me, please subscribe to my channel, give it a thumbs up and ring the bell. You can also visit my website: ThePatternParadigm.com for transcripts of all these videos.
Thank you.
Comments