15 Matching Annotations
  1. Jul 2022
    1. he distinguishes three dimensions of dependent origination and this is in his commentary on the guardian of malama jamaica carica called clear words he talks about causal dependence that is every phenomenon depends upon causes and 00:16:19 conditions and gives rise to further causes and conditions um myriological dependence that is every phenomenon every composite phenomenon depends upon the parts that uh that it 00:16:31 comprises and every phenomenon is also dependent upon the holes or the systems in which it figures parts depend on holes holes depend on parts and that reciprocal meteorological dependence 00:16:44 characterizes all of reality and third often overlooked but most important is dependence on conceptual imputation that is things depend in order to be represented as the kinds of 00:16:57 things they are on our conceptual resources our affective resources and as john dunn emphasized our purposes in life this third one really means this um 00:17:09 everything that shows up for us in the world the way we carve the world up the way we um the way we experience the world is dependent not just on how the world is but on the conceptual resources 00:17:22 as well as the perceptual resources through which we understand the world and it's worth recognizing that um when we think about this there are a bunch of um contemporary majamakers majamikas we 00:17:34 might point to as well and so paul fireauben who's up there on on the left well really an austrian but he spent much of his life in america um willard van norman kwine um up on the right wilford sellers and paul churchland

      This is a key statement: how we experience the world depends on the perceptual and cognitive lens used to filter the world through.

      Francis Heylighen proposes a nondual system based on causal dependency relationships to serve as the foundation for distributed cognition.(collective intelligence).

      https://hyp.is/go?url=https%3A%2F%2Fbafybeicho2xrqouoq4cvqev3l2p44rapi6vtmngfdt42emek5lyygbp3sy.ipfs.dweb.link%2FNon-dualism%2520-%2520Mind%2520outside%2520Brain%2520%2520a%2520radically%2520non-dualist%2520foundation%2520for%2520distributed%2520cognition.pdf&group=world

  2. bafybeicho2xrqouoq4cvqev3l2p44rapi6vtmngfdt42emek5lyygbp3sy.ipfs.dweb.link bafybeicho2xrqouoq4cvqev3l2p44rapi6vtmngfdt42emek5lyygbp3sy.ipfs.dweb.link
    1. ind outside Brain:a radically non-dualist foundation for distributed cognition
      • Title: Mind outside Brain: a radically non-dualist foundation for distributed cognition
      • Author: Heylighen, Francis & Beigi, Shima
      • Date: 2016
    2. We approach the problem of the extended mind from a radically non-dualistperspective. The separation between mind and matter is an artefact of the outdatedmechanistic worldview, which leaves no room for mental phenomena such as agency,intentionality, or feeling. We propose to replace it by an action ontology, which conceivesmind and matter as aspects of the same network of processes. By adopting the intentionalstance, we interpret the catalysts of elementary reactions as agents exhibiting desires,intentions, and sensations. Autopoietic networks of reactions constitute more complex super-agents, which moreover exhibit memory, deliberation and sense-making. In the specific caseof social networks, individual agents coordinate their actions via the propagation ofchallenges. The distributed cognition that emerges from this interaction cannot be situated inany individual brain. This non-dualist, holistic view extends and operationalizes processmetaphysics and Eastern philosophies. It is supported by both mindfulness experiences andmathematical models of action, self-organization, and cognition.

      The proposal is to interpret mind and matter as aspects of the same process network, and decouple both from the Cartesian/Newtonian mechanistic worldview. Catalysts of elementary reactions are agents exhibiting intention, which can exhibit increasingly complex behavior Distributed cognition that emerges from high level social interactions cannot be situated in any single individual brain.

  3. Oct 2020
    1. Technology integration has also been shown to help create more authentic learning environments where the students are more motivated to attend, have a greater chance of communication and collaboration and have more opportunities to use higher order thinking and problem solving skills connected to real world applications (Fouts, 2000) This has led some to believe that new theories in learning needed to be developed that would help to support the creation of such learning environments. The three emerging theories discussed in this paper all possess the ability to support the creation of such learning environments.  They all support the idea that learning is through action.  They all support that cognition happens through communication and collaboration with others.  They all support the use of technology to help in the creation of such learning environments. It is through these new theories that learning environments, which support the development of these higher-level learning skills, can be created.  

      This appears to be a paper written by an upper-level undergraduate (based on the writing), describing the importance of technology in 21st century education and describing three cognitive theories, all requiring collaborative learning, The author highlights the importance of student engagement through technology, which students like, and assumes its importance in the workplace. 5/10

  4. Sep 2020
  5. Jan 2019
    1. priori. Such is the situation with disaster.We easily dismisshow uncertainsituations of disaster areor can become, and how a goalin safety-critical work is to avert situations beforethey become problems. Much of the work in safety-and time-critical matters in CSCW appreciates the implications of this goalon vigilance, mutual awareness, and, of course, error, especially propagated error. It is all too easy to blame “pilot error” when a sequence of preceding systemic conditions took place to set a pilot up for perceiving the problem as he or she did [34,48], including one that warns of hazard. Indeed, disaster can magnifyproblems, not necessarily out of proportion, though that can happen, but rather too so that wefocusonspecific detailswhen many things are happening.

      Evokes distributed cognition (Hutchins) as well as the uncertain nature of safety- and time-critical work and how to classify risk/need.

    2. Mendonça, et al.[26] and Kendra and Wachtendorf [20] have characterized this as improvisation, whichhas strong parallels to the conversations in CSCW about the nature of situated cognition or situated work [14,44], as well as the relationship between informal as well as formal aspects of work [30,44]

      Evokes situated action (Suchman) and distributed cognition (Hutchins)

    3. Threaded throughout thesearguments is the idea of distributed cognition particularly as it materializes in the on-the-ground work, but also through prior online preparation.Through this lens, we see how ideation ofsolutions sprung from uncertainexpressions ofproblem statementswhich were quickly forwardedto the local (or local enough) domain experts—horsepeople in Colora

      Evokes distributed cognition

    1. n particular, we note how recent extensions to Activity Theory have addressed theoretical shortcomings similar to our five challenges and suggest directions for bridging the gap between everyday practice and systems support

      theoretical base for the case study.

      Tie this back to HCC readings/critiques by Halverson and Hutchins on distributed cognition.

    2. These extensions increase the complexity of the Activity Theory model but also help to explain tensions present in real-world systems such as when one agent plays different roles in two systems that have divergent goals. Furthermore, this approach provides Activity Theory with a similar degree of agility in representing complex, distributed cognition as competing theoretical approaches, such as Distributed Cognition (Hutchins, 1995).

      flexibility of Activity Theory over DCog

  6. Dec 2018
    1. Visibility of communication exchanges and of information enableslearning and greater efficiencies

      Evokes the distributed cognition literature as well peer production, crowdsourcing, and collective intelligence practices.

  7. Jul 2018
    1. Drawing on the theory of distributed cognition [5], we utilizerepresentational physical artifacts to provide a tangible interface for task planning, aural cues for time passage, and an ambient, glanceable display to convey status

      Is there a way to integrate dCog and a more sociotemporal theory, like Zimbardo & Boyd's Time Perspective Theory or some of Adam's work on timescapes?

  8. Sep 2015
    1. It is a matter of how personsand their social and cultural worlds are inseparable, thoroughly

      Continued on next page. This is the definition of distributed cognition. "their thinking is irreducible to individual properties, intelligence, or traits."

    2. The classroom is physically organized to facilitate the distributionof activities and the use of multiple resources, especially books, aspart of the activities

      There is a materialism to distributed cognition. The artifacts matter, as a part of the fabric of the socially shared learning/thinking process.

    3. thinking as distributed dynamically in inter-personal relationships among people, their artifacts, and their envi-ronments

      Thinking as distributed. When I think about what that means for a classroom I immediately go to the understanding that learning happens through dialogue and interaction (between people, artifacts and the environment). This means a focus on those interactions is necessary to see/develop classroom thinking. How does that fit into a theory of communities of practice and LPP?