tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1483944200593561804.post5284073467664484967..comments2023-12-20T19:30:28.788-05:00Comments on Fixing Psychology: Why am I suspicious of the Ecological Approach to touch (haptic perception)?Eric Charleshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17412168482569793996noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1483944200593561804.post-56754731668395494902013-01-19T09:49:45.201-05:002013-01-19T09:49:45.201-05:00Henry,
"Carry the array around with us" ...Henry,<br />"Carry the array around with us" also sounds weird... but maybe a bit better. There <i>is</i> certainly a difference wherein active touch creates the information (in a very concrete sense), but we typically do not create the information when using other perceptual systems. <br /><br />We do create some of the information used in other modalities, but <i>indirectly</i>. See Eric Charleshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17412168482569793996noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1483944200593561804.post-44223628499855711482013-01-13T05:21:48.760-05:002013-01-13T05:21:48.760-05:00Henry, I think you're in the ball park here. Y...Henry, I think you're in the ball park here. You have to keep two things separate; the dynamic property to be perceived and the kinematic information used to perceive it. The property is rightfully external to the organism. However haptics is a modality in which the kinematic consequences of that dynamic property occur within the organism. The organism faces the same problem, however; detect Andrewhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16732977871048876430noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1483944200593561804.post-31829439274350541392013-01-12T19:35:37.887-05:002013-01-12T19:35:37.887-05:00Actually, you're right, there is a bit of a di...Actually, you're right, there is a bit of a disanalogy here. We certainly don't sample the myofascial array as we do the optic array, for example. I do see your concern. Hmmm...<br /><br />Perhaps the resolution lies in distinguishing between the information sources and the properties they provide information about. I think the concern with dualism is with regards to the latter, not the Henry Harrisonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05262610561319797094noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1483944200593561804.post-39110701582915226492013-01-12T16:07:04.822-05:002013-01-12T16:07:04.822-05:00Surely no one could object that the myofascial tis...Surely no one could object that the myofascial tissue is involved in perceiving certain object properties, just as rods and cones are involved perceiving other object properties. But we are (I think unanimously) insistent that the information supporting vision is not <i>in</i> the rods and cones, nor any other part of the body. Even ignoring the specification problem, there seemed (I thought Eric Charleshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17412168482569793996noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1483944200593561804.post-74749444851650818342013-01-12T16:04:20.136-05:002013-01-12T16:04:20.136-05:00Henry,
I am open to having my suspicions assuaged....Henry,<br />I am open to having my suspicions assuaged. I am not sure this is the wrong way to go... I am just suspicious. Do you interpret TSRM and Gibson on visual perception differently than I do?Eric Charleshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17412168482569793996noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1483944200593561804.post-2426131323431746132013-01-12T14:00:02.841-05:002013-01-12T14:00:02.841-05:00Isn't another component of the ecological appr...Isn't another component of the ecological approach the idea that the internal/external boundary is unimportant? It seems to me that mechanical transformations of the myofascial field specific to object properties (or, properties of the combined SE system) is analogous to transformations of the array specific to object properties (or...). I don't see any grounds for assuming information isHenry Harrisonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05262610561319797094noreply@blogger.com