Q: DO ABSTRACT OBJECTS EXIST? (Philosophy) Given: Existance = Persistence Wherea

Q: DO ABSTRACT OBJECTS EXIST?
(Philosophy)

Given: Existance = Persistence
Whereas;
… 1. Patterns of constant relations exist, for the simple reason that the universe and all in it, is constructed of a vast, hierarchy of stable (constant, persistent) relations that requires energy (change) to change state (alter those persistent, stable, relations).
… 2. Humans identify those patterns as fragments, parts, objects, spaces, and backgrounds.
… 3. Humans combine those patterns into episodes of objects, spaces and backgrounds.
… 4. Humans identify patterns between episodes and their constituent parts
… 5. Humans predict by auto association futures of episodes, and their parts, Objects in relation to one another, or objects an their parts. etc.
… 6. This predictive capacity results over time in categorizing Episodes, objects, relations, and properties into generalizations we call categories of ‘marginally indifferent relations’.
… 7. We then repeat the process with these categories.
… 8. This process scales into imagination, fictionalism, fiction, story-making, sequence-making (pathfinding), etc.
And Whereas;
… 9. Human memory stores the hierarchy of these predictive sequences and resulting patterns through repetition (both temporarily and then especially during the first sleep cycle).
… 10. These relations are then re-constructed from memory whenever stimulation is provided to the network of stored sequences – always by auto-association.
Therefore;
…11. Abstract objects in any sense (a) require human sense, perception, prediction, episoding, indexing, and memory. (b) must be reconstructed every time they are referenced, just like running must be reconstructed by the movement of the legs. (c) even if recorded by some symbols or marks, must be reconstructed by sense perception using from the symbols or marks.
… 12. As such abstract objects have the potential to exist (persist), but must always be constructed (reconstructed).
… 13. Any other claims is a word game. Whether we call that word game an analogy, sophistry, a pseudoscience, or a lie is merely the paradigm with which it’s stated and the consequence of the utterance.
-Fin-