 |
 |
Dear Keith, I have not read the article you refer to, but for a detailed and fascinating discussion of embodied cognition and emotions and how they are used and link with AI, see Clark, A. (1997). Being There. Putting Brain, Body, and World Together Again. Cambridge, MA, MIT Press. Dr Thea Blackler Senior Lecturer School of Design Queensland University of Technology Brisbane Australia Phone: +61 7 3138 7030 Mobile: +61 410 736494 -----Original Message----- From: PhD-Design - This list is for discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Keith Russell Sent: Wednesday, 1 April 2009 8:23 AM To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: Intuition in design Hey Don I know the article is talking to issues associated with robots Ortony, A., Norman, D. A., & Revelle, W. (2005). The role of affect and proto-affect in effective functioning. In J.-M. Fellous & M. A. Arbib (Eds.), Who Needs Emotions? (pp.173-202). New York: Oxford University Press. but I get concerned that in its quest for reverse designing a brain it ends up with a set of vice grips when what was needed was a clothes peg. I'm not quite sure why the bits get rearranged as they do except that it might help establish the logic diagram of a robot brain. That is, we need one of these chips and one of those and then a set of connections and logic gates that allow for these defined affects to make these predicted links with this other process. Moods, for example, would seem to be relegated to the dust bin of cognitive processes because they are not quite so useful in terms of motivated and or reflected on outcomes. And yet, moods (atmospheres) are sustainable over days, weeks, months, years as identity affects that permit the kinds of sustained engagement that is required for all work more serious that selecting a font for this year's Christmas card. And, where are the experts on emotions in terms of those who work through/with them as their main practice? Yet again we get models of damaged brains as the basis of healthy ones and non-ones (robots). There are better uses for philosophy. cheers keith