Don and I speak from totally different paradigms: incommensurable frames of reference.
To quote Dom:
> I thought then, and still do, that to deny information p[rocessing mechanisms within the brain is to deny reality.
We live in different realities. Putting it bluntly from my point of view ‘information processing mechanisms are the phlogiston of the mind, along with many other mechanistic mentalist terms.
Having done a little bit of work in semiotics, I do not share Don’s confidence in “signifiers” as clarifying anything. From my point of view (the reality in which I live) “signifiers” muddy the waters further, do not offer a way through, and provide only a brief postponement of an endless regress.
In an earlier post I said:
> Don, sometimes I wish that we did not speak in such declarative put-downs and gave other people the opportunity to speak from their own position.
For those of you interested in other positions than information processing coming from psychology, have a look at:
Neisser, U. (1976). Cognition and reality: Principles and implications of cognitive psychology. New York: Freeman
David
--
blog: http://communication.org.au/blo <http://communication.org.au/blo>g/
web: http://communication.org.au <http://communication.org.au/>
Professor David Sless BA MSc FRSA
CEO • Communication Research Institute •
• helping people communicate with people •
Mobile: +61 (0)412 356 795
Phone: +61 (03) 9005 5903
Skype: davidsless
60 Park Street • Fitzroy North • Melbourne • Australia • 3068
> On 19 Nov. 2016, at 5:17 am, Don Norman <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> I thought then, and
> still do, that to deny information p[rocessing mechanisms within the brain
> is to deny reality.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask]>
Discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design
Subscribe or Unsubscribe at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|