Re: [xmca] perception/conception etc

[ERIC.RAMBERG@spps.org]

Martin:

I agree that increasing the vernacular does not increase understanding.

Yet still my perception of music differs from others but yet my concept 
does not, would you agree with that?

Try listening to Lou Reed's" Machine Metal Music" and tell me what you 
think.

eric



From:   Martin Packer <packer@duq.edu>
To:     "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
Date:   07/09/2010 11:46 AM
Subject:        Re: [xmca] perception/conception etc
Sent by:        xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu



Eric,

For me, the question that needs to be answered is why we need to introduce 
a new term, "percept." We can all talk about 'perception,' as an active 
process of interaction with the world, right? What is gained when we start 
to talk about 'percepts,' as though there are some little entities 
floating around somewhere? Haven't we turned a process into an entity?

The university has a good selection of DVDs, and I recently checked out 
the first season of the cable TV channel Showtime's series The Tudors, 
which recounts how Henry VIII's need for a male heir led to the rupture 
between England and the Catholic Church. It's not exactly aiming for 
historical accuracy, but I was then motivated to check out Elton's history 
of the period and it turns out the series does a pretty good job of 
touching on most of the important events.
 
Everyone in the show is a fashion statement, including Cardinal Wolsey 
who, as played by Sam Neil, is both cunning and likable. He shows up each 
time in a different outfit, wearing a variety of official headgear, each 
in that rich cardinal red.

One morning I was fixing breakfast and reached out for the salt shaker. 
It's made of transparent plastic with a lid, something we picked up at the 
supermarket. But the lid is bright red, and (and here's the point; thanks 
for your patience!) as I picked it up, for a second or two what I saw was 
a little cardinal.

That seems to me a nice example of what Mike has been exploring, the 
active and ongoing character of perception, in which conceiving and 
perceiving are intimately linked. I see the object *through* and *in 
terms* of a concept (though we're still none to sure what that is!), in 
this case the concept of cardinal that had been enriched by watching the 
TV show. The process is not entirely within me as an individual, because 
the salt shaker did its part. 

To me, saying that I "have" a "percept" doesn't help me understand this 
process. The percept would be -  what, a little red cardinal? or is the 
percept the salt shaker, and I impose a concept of cardinal on it? but 
isn't 'salt shaker' a concept too?? Putting all of this stuff inside the 
individual leads to an infinite regress, not a satisfactory explanation 
(or even description) of what is going on.

Martin

On Jul 9, 2010, at 10:43 AM, ERIC.RAMBERG@spps.org wrote:

> Percept would be preference?  I don't know exactly but people do not 
> operate upon appropriated concepts 100% of the time.  Do they? Certainly 

> children do not.  Currently I am not exactly sure what the question is 
> that needs to be answered.
> 
> Perhaps the percept in the 'not-wanting-to-listen-to-dylan" for me would 

> be I would prefer listening to the radio seeing as he never gets any air 

> time or perhaps it would be that I am stuck inside of mobile with the 
> memphis blues again? 
> 
> That certainly is a great question.  Others with 
> thoughts/percepts/concepts?
> 
> eric
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From:   Martin Packer <packer@duq.edu>
> To:     "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
> Date:   07/09/2010 09:14 AM
> Subject:        Re: [xmca] perception/conception etc
> Sent by:        xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu
> 
> 
> 
> OK, Eric let's suppose you woke up this morning not wanting to listen to 

> Dylan. What is the percept in that situation? Dylan? His music? Your 
> temporary dislike? The fact that yesterday you felt differently?
> 
> Martin
> 
> On Jul 9, 2010, at 8:04 AM, ERIC.RAMBERG@spps.org wrote:
> 
>> Martin:
>> 
>> I understand your misgivings about placing construction within but 
> perhaps 
>> this makes sense:  concepts are appropriated from the social/cultural 
>> arena but percepts are individually based.  My percepts about music may 

>> run counter to yours and there are even days I don't want to listen to 
> Bob 
>> Dylan.  However, I have an appropriated concept of music that is 
> probably 
>> extremely similar to yours.  Does this make sense?  I know this 
>> internal/exteranl debate has raged for years and won't end anytime soon 

>> but some things do indeed happen within.  I still have to think though 
>> that cracking this code between everyday and scietific could assist in 
>> understanding human development.
>> 
>> eric
>> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> xmca mailing list
> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
> 
> _______________________________________________
> xmca mailing list
> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca

_______________________________________________
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca

_______________________________________________
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca