Then in that spirit I'll congratulate you on being the first to see it fully. You realize that there's no use looking though right? Whatever you speculate, the proof will always just be more experience. An ontology isn't possible in that sense, or needed.
IMO an ontology can only ever bring confusion. Naming the patterns and such has value, but committing to the vision will always constrain your thinking.
It's amazing to finally reach this stage of discussion with someone other than the LLMs.
All that said I do have a mental picture of what might be "giving" reality structure but it will always amount to regress axioms or paradox.
Nutshell: I suspect humans are grossly out numbered and out massed in terms of consciousness reality impact by nematodes insects and on up. It could be like a mesh net lucid dream with every mind being a node, and the world only appears so solid to us because so many other players are so consistent and simple.
But again, testing that would just be more experience, more thought constraint. It's much much better to not have an ontology. We have a big enough problem right in our face:
Can you understand the subtractive non-externalist move? (Not trying to sound condescending.) https://philpapers.org/rec/SERTTA-2
Then in that spirit I'll congratulate you on being the first to see it fully. You realize that there's no use looking though right? Whatever you speculate, the proof will always just be more experience. An ontology isn't possible in that sense, or needed.
https://philpapers.org/rec/SERTMW
https://philpapers.org/rec/SERNRJ
https://philpapers.org/rec/SERTLI-2
IMO an ontology can only ever bring confusion. Naming the patterns and such has value, but committing to the vision will always constrain your thinking.
https://philpapers.org/rec/SERTUA
https://philpapers.org/rec/SERGTW
https://philpapers.org/rec/SERTEC
It's amazing to finally reach this stage of discussion with someone other than the LLMs.
All that said I do have a mental picture of what might be "giving" reality structure but it will always amount to regress axioms or paradox.
Nutshell: I suspect humans are grossly out numbered and out massed in terms of consciousness reality impact by nematodes insects and on up. It could be like a mesh net lucid dream with every mind being a node, and the world only appears so solid to us because so many other players are so consistent and simple.
But again, testing that would just be more experience, more thought constraint. It's much much better to not have an ontology. We have a big enough problem right in our face:
https://philpapers.org/rec/SERRRT-3
Sorry for the paper tide, I been at this for like a year. Every single day.
Might just be easier to go skim the abstracts XD
https://philpeople.org/profiles/brandon-sergent/publications
I did a thing :P https://philpapers.org/rec/SERWEC
I think you'd be better off adjusting to frame as pattern analysis rather than pattern origin. :/