Perception May Be Subjective:

Perception might be influenced by:

beliefs
goals
and
external conflict.

Optimists live longer,
Arrogant and talented.

Zen masters and Phyrronean skeptics recommend abandoning personal:

beliefs
goals
and
external conflict.

All in light of what you meant,
enlightenment.

D.H. makes a good point, suggesting that we imbue our relationships by re-presenting sensations:

What's up in the sky while you're down on the ground.
Look up to your hero while looking down at his grave.

Perception of a situation can be radically reshaped when necessary.
The new conservatives call each other by the names of the old radicals.

When perception and a situation do not meet flush, which do we try to radically reshape?

My Objectivity:
I feel I am very objective,
so much to the fact that,
if a consensus must be reached,
I routinely offer my point of view
as the standard interpretation.

A cheap tailor in the presence of the naked emperor will tell you, the 20-cent alteration, the "paradigm shift", is often regarded
as the process of viewing the world in a radically different way.

Do you find
that the fact that I can with relative/relevant ease
describe my understanding of DNA in terms of computer code,
a coincidence?

Coincidence is one of those messy relationships not easily represented by our sensations.
Perception of Purpose and Intention
can be radically altered by
constraints of the intellect,
beliefs, goals, and external conflict.

"If one restricts the domain, some understanding may be at our grasp" pg-190.

"If instead of using the [real world], one carefully creates a simpler, {artificial world}
in which to study high level perception, the problems become more (tractable)." -pg190.

Translation by Substitution

If instead of using [Objectivity], one carefully creates a simpler, {subjective experience}
in which to study high level perception, the problems become more (traceable).

Does the translation detract from our previous interpretation?

Our MicroDomain:
Let's put a pretty face on it, and trace it's success back to the features of it's face.
Lets put an ugly face on it, and trace it's failures back to the features of it's face.

D.H. keeps saying that all these poor programs,
only sound like they're supposed to.
What's under the surface of the referenced application isn't applicable.
They're skull-fudging the numbers to win the beauty contest.

"While microdomains may superficially seem less impressive than "real world" domains,
the fact that they are explicitly idealized worlds allows the issues under study to be thrown into clear relief" -pg192.

Can someone explain why the phrase "Prolog with weighting" was stuck in my head the entire time I was reading>?