I see that there is a reality that is beyond conceptualize. It is spiritual. It is consciousness. As McGilchrist points out, consciousness suggests something that we are conscious of. However, I believe that this consciousness is a type of communication that is non-verbal. It is a type of embodied communication. The challenge we face is that in our time we've elevated simulated reality to be equivalent to the reality that I see transcending our capacity to define it will absolute specificity and control. I wrote a series of five posts, all linked together here
It does add to the discussion Ed. The simulation/simulacra bit is alienating/dislocating people from the world. NS Lyons (https://theupheaval.substack.com/p/reality-honks-back) talks about the difference between "Physicals" and "Virtuals", which echoes an earlier framing of "Anywheres" and "Somewheres"- people that can work virtually from anywhere and those tied to a specific geographic location. We need to find a use of technology that situates it in a healthy way with the other biological, physical, and in person relations needs of the human.
Finnish architect Juhani Pallasmaa, in his book The Eyes of the Skin: Architecture and The Senses, writes,
“… I wished to express the significance of the tactile sense of our experience and understanding of the world, but I also intended to create a conceptual short circuit between the dominant sense of vision and the suppressed modality of touch. … The significant of the tactile sense in human life has become increasingly evident. The view of Ashley Montagu, the anthropologist, based on medical evidence, confirms the primacy of the haptic realm:
‘(The skin) is the oldest and the most sensitive of our organs, our first medium of communication, and our most efficient protector … Even the transparent cornea of the eye is overlain by a layer of modified skin … Touch is the parent of our eyes, ears, nose, and mouth. It is the sense which became differentiated into the others, a fact that seems to be recognized in the age-old evaluation of touch as ‘the mother of the senses’. ….
The computer is usually seen as a solely beneficial invention, which liberates human fantasy and facilitates efficient design work. I wish to express my serious concern in this respect, at least considering the current role of the computer in education and the design process. Computer imaging tends to flatten out magnificent, multi-sensory, simultaneous and synchronic capacities of imagination, a retinal journey. The computer creates a distance between the maker and the object, whereas drawing by hand as well as working with models put the designer in haptic contact with the object, or space. In our imagination, the object is simultaneously held in the hand and inside the head, and the imagined and projected physical image is modeled by our embodied imagination. We are inside and outside of the conceived object at the same time. Creative work calls for a bodily and mental identification, empathy and compassion.”
Hopefully Meta isn't working on better and better haptic suits, haha. Yes, I think the costs/drawbacks/limitations of the medium are coming into focus, and people will find the right amount of "touch grass" for their lives. (Every time I say that my teenage daughter dies a little inside so I try to throw it in whenever I can ;) )
We are doubling up on fridays and mondays now, but you do have a lot to say. There is something sacred in the mix, trust has to be involved somewhere along the line to function on the highest levels, and when others sense that you try to have integrity in all your dealings, they give you back the same regard, thus the human cohesion. You can't fake it; people have good bs detectors. If you project sincere regard for others, that's generally what you get back. Some refer to some of these things as the 'eternal verities'.
I like this trail you are walking down.
I see that there is a reality that is beyond conceptualize. It is spiritual. It is consciousness. As McGilchrist points out, consciousness suggests something that we are conscious of. However, I believe that this consciousness is a type of communication that is non-verbal. It is a type of embodied communication. The challenge we face is that in our time we've elevated simulated reality to be equivalent to the reality that I see transcending our capacity to define it will absolute specificity and control. I wrote a series of five posts, all linked together here
- https://edbrenegar.substack.com/p/icymi-reality-and-the-culture-of. I hope it adds to this discussion.
It does add to the discussion Ed. The simulation/simulacra bit is alienating/dislocating people from the world. NS Lyons (https://theupheaval.substack.com/p/reality-honks-back) talks about the difference between "Physicals" and "Virtuals", which echoes an earlier framing of "Anywheres" and "Somewheres"- people that can work virtually from anywhere and those tied to a specific geographic location. We need to find a use of technology that situates it in a healthy way with the other biological, physical, and in person relations needs of the human.
Finnish architect Juhani Pallasmaa, in his book The Eyes of the Skin: Architecture and The Senses, writes,
“… I wished to express the significance of the tactile sense of our experience and understanding of the world, but I also intended to create a conceptual short circuit between the dominant sense of vision and the suppressed modality of touch. … The significant of the tactile sense in human life has become increasingly evident. The view of Ashley Montagu, the anthropologist, based on medical evidence, confirms the primacy of the haptic realm:
‘(The skin) is the oldest and the most sensitive of our organs, our first medium of communication, and our most efficient protector … Even the transparent cornea of the eye is overlain by a layer of modified skin … Touch is the parent of our eyes, ears, nose, and mouth. It is the sense which became differentiated into the others, a fact that seems to be recognized in the age-old evaluation of touch as ‘the mother of the senses’. ….
The computer is usually seen as a solely beneficial invention, which liberates human fantasy and facilitates efficient design work. I wish to express my serious concern in this respect, at least considering the current role of the computer in education and the design process. Computer imaging tends to flatten out magnificent, multi-sensory, simultaneous and synchronic capacities of imagination, a retinal journey. The computer creates a distance between the maker and the object, whereas drawing by hand as well as working with models put the designer in haptic contact with the object, or space. In our imagination, the object is simultaneously held in the hand and inside the head, and the imagined and projected physical image is modeled by our embodied imagination. We are inside and outside of the conceived object at the same time. Creative work calls for a bodily and mental identification, empathy and compassion.”
Hopefully Meta isn't working on better and better haptic suits, haha. Yes, I think the costs/drawbacks/limitations of the medium are coming into focus, and people will find the right amount of "touch grass" for their lives. (Every time I say that my teenage daughter dies a little inside so I try to throw it in whenever I can ;) )
We are doubling up on fridays and mondays now, but you do have a lot to say. There is something sacred in the mix, trust has to be involved somewhere along the line to function on the highest levels, and when others sense that you try to have integrity in all your dealings, they give you back the same regard, thus the human cohesion. You can't fake it; people have good bs detectors. If you project sincere regard for others, that's generally what you get back. Some refer to some of these things as the 'eternal verities'.