I really appreciate this channel posting these videos. I'm a new graduate student in a neuroscience department at a medical university. My particular lab is really more experimental and theoretical than it is clinically oriented. My adviser comes from a background oriented in a Gibsonian approach, so she's quite open to a lot of these ideas. I myself have been rather skeptical of computer functionalism. I'm exploring a variety of ideas including Gibson's ideas, so this was very informative.
Brandon Vaughan Brandon Vaughan Sounds great Brandon. There is also a related Facebook page you can join: PA Channel. Neuroscience is lost without an understanding of the "what" question - what is detected/responded to and Gibson more than anyone asked that question while everyone else was rushing into asking "how", assuming the basic question had been answered. "Ask not what's inside your head but what your head's inside of" (Bill Mace).
It's not that bad!! You can see the slides even, in places. Regardless, communication involves more than Powerpoint slides. I think the videographer did a good job. PIP would have been nice but you can't have everything! Even OHP slides can be good... th-cam.com/video/cWztQt_nlDU/w-d-xo.html
thank you very much for this lecture. I am currently writing my thesis where I am trying to explain the use of virtual reality based therapy with an ecological approach. Anyhow, would it be possible to find the ppt file somehow of this presentation. I am trying to use some of the examples maybe and I am not sure about the origins and the citations in this video. Thank you for your help
I'm not sure why Mr. Heft hedges the issue of naive-realism and direct-perception. His presentation characterizes Gibson as within a tradition of cognitive psychology and that is not quite acccurate.
The preservation of naive realism has particular significance to user-centered design. That there is a paradigm which is useful to the specification of ontological perceptions is novel. And also that the regularities of invariance are reliable through the deeper structures of experience.
@@ArtOlson2008 Yes. There's nothing wrong with everyday perception. "Naive realism" is an elitist and pejorative term invented by those who don't get it, and got it so wrong. Unfortunately they make up the vast majority of academic who consider these things. It goes much deeper than affordances and pragmatism; consciousness is still not considered, even by those who understand the basics of ecological information.
@@perceivingacting Searle's argument enabling the subjective reporting of pain from patients' user centered accounts, also roughly coincided with the pharmaceutical epidemic in the 2000s. that put oxycontin, fentanyl, vicodin and at the disposal of lax "user-centered" / physician-enabled assesment criteria. The blame is not on Searle, but there are serious ethical pitfalls to enabling user centered assessments and self-diagnosis to patients or clinicians on the basis of reported pain.
I really appreciate this channel posting these videos. I'm a new graduate student in a neuroscience department at a medical university. My particular lab is really more experimental and theoretical than it is clinically oriented. My adviser comes from a background oriented in a Gibsonian approach, so she's quite open to a lot of these ideas. I myself have been rather skeptical of computer functionalism. I'm exploring a variety of ideas including Gibson's ideas, so this was very informative.
Brandon Vaughan Brandon Vaughan
Sounds great Brandon. There is also a related Facebook page you can
join: PA Channel. Neuroscience is lost without an understanding of the
"what" question - what is detected/responded to and Gibson more than
anyone asked that question while everyone else was rushing into asking
"how", assuming the basic question had been answered. "Ask not what's
inside your head but what your head's inside of" (Bill Mace).
It's unfortunate how low quality this video is, the text in these slides are barely visible.
It's not that bad!! You can see the slides even, in places. Regardless, communication involves more than Powerpoint slides. I think the videographer did a good job. PIP would have been nice but you can't have everything! Even OHP slides can be good...
th-cam.com/video/cWztQt_nlDU/w-d-xo.html
+1TonneDown Sure!
His voice sounds SO similar to Sam Harris!
thank you very much for this lecture. I am currently writing my thesis where I am trying to explain the use of virtual reality based therapy with an ecological approach. Anyhow, would it be possible to find the ppt file somehow of this presentation. I am trying to use some of the examples maybe and I am not sure about the origins and the citations in this video.
Thank you for your help
+Valentin Nerding A couple of videos:
th-cam.com/video/_p6etWqTn28/w-d-xo.html
th-cam.com/video/9buR1r-0Sfk/w-d-xo.html
th-cam.com/video/-NpMxKdImKw/w-d-xo.html
Did it help?
I'm not sure why Mr. Heft hedges the issue of naive-realism and direct-perception. His presentation characterizes Gibson as within a tradition of cognitive psychology and that is not quite acccurate.
Even Searle embraced naive realism and said Gibson was the best game in town!
th-cam.com/video/ve0c0B47xJw/w-d-xo.html
See my exposition:
th-cam.com/video/_bf3lQ95ghk/w-d-xo.html
The preservation of naive realism has particular significance to user-centered design. That there is a paradigm which is useful to the specification of ontological perceptions is novel. And also that the regularities of invariance are reliable through the deeper structures of experience.
@@ArtOlson2008 Yes. There's nothing wrong with everyday perception. "Naive realism" is an elitist and pejorative term invented by those who don't get it, and got it so wrong. Unfortunately they make up the vast majority of academic who consider these things. It goes much deeper than affordances and pragmatism; consciousness is still not considered, even by those who understand the basics of ecological information.
@@perceivingacting Searle's argument enabling the subjective reporting of pain from patients' user centered accounts, also roughly coincided with the pharmaceutical epidemic in the 2000s. that put oxycontin, fentanyl, vicodin and at the disposal of lax "user-centered" / physician-enabled assesment criteria. The blame is not on Searle, but there are serious ethical pitfalls to enabling user centered assessments and self-diagnosis to patients or clinicians on the basis of reported pain.
that's an hour and half we won't get back again
Shit happens.
"off of"? and this is a professor? Aha