Berkeley Babes wrote, :
“WHAT IS YOUR CONTEXT FOR constant CONTEXT SEEKING?”
Context is overly abstract, too remote from literal defining moment. I would call contextual something which is more dynamic, like a chess game. The moves, some way ahead of any relationship with previous moves, leave huge gaps ahead.
What is constraining is the multiform connections between various former and later moves. The degree of right and wrong moves may determine the ultimate goal of the game played.
In this way , the verity of contexts may appear as shaded more or less empty or saturated scenes, as predicated as moving along more progressively , or regressively in relation to the set goal…
This is more definitive then attempts to define context in any modicum of value, for this results in increased uncertainty.
The closer the set of quantifiable progressions, the less uncertainty is knocked out learning. A totally regressed discontinuous set of variable functions reduces to near total ambiguity, partly differentiated sets of hypothetical suppositions, based entirely a mix of propositional simulations.
Easier said, families of resemblances and the totally regressive functional meta values become increasingly imperceptible by way of an amalgam of possible choices , hence knowledge becomes unscrambled.
Contextual uncertainty is like a beginner’s chess game, trying to guess the opponents breath of moves ahead.
The computer is winning chess, it’s history now that IBMs Deep Blue has beat the then current Russian Grandmaster.
So that brings on the idea that more memory entails more possibility for learning, and appears to signal the advantage of a-posteriori ive a-priori knowledge
Context matters of course, but it’s significance is reduced into more into more general sets. ( settings, contextually)
This dramatic elaboration of more remote settings, gave rise to the Birth of Tragedy, of the idea of the essential fade into larger inclusive sets.
The significance of this regression , lies in more neutral it insignificant. sets of specific reason , in connection ti a vast array of general sets, which need ultimately only very little contrast between the internal and external dimensions of contextual determinants.
God, energy and all else can regressively fit into this pantheistic grab bag, and it become the idea of the preexistence of the known, even as an eternally reoccurring set of phenomenon.
The philosophy becomes once again, a game supported by logically consistant sources if remote elements.
The question then becomes one, which should be asked, is learning by necessity, mode expedient, than learning then one defined by arbitrary sets consisting of less objectively convertible criteria.
there are mixes o between objective and subjective games and like and The Prisoner’s dilemma can show the level of necessary vs. contingent elements which shed light on the outcome driven by self serving and or other serving interests.
The more pressing the social to the detriment of more famial sets relationships, the more opaque and washed the individual learning performance becomes.
The correspondence between the dynamic participation and the formal necessary signal form different shades of meaning, defining the ’ contexts’ within which performances in the drama become more predictable, and objective.
The point is, we must not envision any objective relation as set in a fixed criterion of meaning
Have any of us could have gone through life without either forms of kearning, regardless how complies or trivial . No. Even rote behavior like learning by trial and error works as described, that game defined by loss and gain.
A gain is signified a saturation , while loss by further unsaturated values of composition. The interesting thing is that increasingly saturated vale does not always correspond to gain in significance.
As an example, in the game of gambling, for instance , a loss at times has more value, since it reduces motivation to gamble again, and in addition transvalue ethical to morall considerations of value.
The same idea can be found between ideological considerations, between material and spiritually vested value, if in fact such difference is recognizes.
We can unlearn even long standing moral imperatives for ethically vested liberal forms of thinking