I was sympathetic about an ontology of patterns, but it seem it is lacking.
How can a monistic theory of patterns ( math, physical things, mental states can all be seen as patterns ) genuine deal with the idea of facts ( 5 is prime, "taller than" relation is transitive ) ? How can we interpret facts as patterns ?
You could say that facts depend on sufficient cognition enough in order to be recognized, and hence they are mere ideas or thoughts ( they would then patterns that can be triggered on the brains of a community ). But i think facts are more than ideas or thoughts, i assume even without cognition, facts would still exist, for instance , the fact that 5 is prime.
So, can facts be considered as patterns, but more than patterns merely representing ideas or thoughts ? If, not perhaps the only way would be to consider an ontology made not only of patterns, but also of facts ( pluralism ).
What do you guys think ?