RE: [humanmarkup-comment] Base Schema-haptic

[Rex Brooks <rexb@starbourne.com>]

Hi Everyone,

Busy weekend. While I have a lot of reservations about Gudwin's 
phraseology, I accept that the work was probably done by someone who 
is not a native speaker of English nor a student of English, and, as 
Len says, the models are [reasonably--my adjective] sound. So I am 
prepared to accept that model as an extension of the  semiotic 
modelling we have already accepted. (Okay, where's the earthquake, 
trumpets and assorted special effects?)

I also wanted to add that while teasing out the point of divergence 
between emotional non-verbal and perhaps involuntary instances of 
haptic activity and clearly volitional, message (sign) emitting 
activity will need further attention, as will the discrimination 
between sensing and emitting haptic activity, I am pretty thoroughly 
satisfied with Len's element listing in the straw man schema.

Just so you know, this is the first step I've ever taken down the 
road to endorsing both a model of perception and codification for how 
intelligence can identified and how knowledge can be represented, and 
I'm not especially happy about it. Locke, Kant, Berkeley, 
Wittgenstein, Korzybski, and Kierkegaard notwithstanding, I will keep 
my reservations.

Ciao,
Rex

At 9:42 AM -0500 8/23/02, Bullard, Claude L (Len) wrote:
>My first stab at that would be a proximity-driven
>definition in which each member depending on
>internal learned contexts in relationship to
>the real time situation has different values
>for touching and what the signs indicate,
>typically, a polarity where on that scale,
>each gets a different value in a highly
>mixed set (different internal values because
>of different internal contexts, but mediated
>by awareness of the social context; in Rome
>do as Romans do, so the signs they emit will
>be mediated); and fairly similar if flocking
>(relatively similar values in the same culture
>in the same context).
>
>Makes for a nicely creative scene of networked
>objects.
>
>len
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Rex Brooks [mailto:rexb@starbourne.com]
>
>Yes. I'm just looking to tease out those relationships and the
>situatedness you mention, and which David Dodds is working on, too.
>Haptics per se is just touching behavior, but we have to make sure we
>demarcate where touching and sensing diverge, while recognizing that
>in some circumstances they merge.
>
>Not an easy distinction when sending and receiving get that close together.


-- 
Rex Brooks
Starbourne Communications Design
1361-A Addison, Berkeley, CA 94702 *510-849-2309
http://www.starbourne.com * rexb@starbourne.com