Epistemic affordances in gestalt perception as well as in emotional facial expressions and gestures

Klaus Schwarzfischer
{"title":"Epistemic affordances in gestalt perception as well as in emotional facial expressions and gestures","authors":"Klaus Schwarzfischer","doi":"10.2478/gth-2021-0016","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Summary Methodological problems often arise when a special case is confused with the general principle. So you will find affordances only for ‚artifacts’ if you restrict the analysis to ‚artifacts’. The general principle, however, is an ‚invitation character’, which triggers an action. Consequently, an action-theoretical approach known as ‚pragmatic turn’ in cognitive science is recommended. According to this approach, the human being is not a passive-receptive being but actively produces those action effects that open up the world to us (through ‚active inferences’). This ‚ideomotor approach’ focuses on the so-called ‚epistemic actions’, which guide our perception as conscious and unconscious cognitions. Due to ‚embodied cognition’ the own body is assigned an indispensable role. The action theoretical approach of ‚enactive cognition’ enables that every form can be consistently processualized. Thus, each ‚Gestalt’ is understood as the process result of interlocking cognitions of ‚forward modelling’ (which produces anticipations and enables prognoses) and ‚inverse modelling’ (which makes hypotheses about genesis and causality). As can be shown, these cognitions are fed by previous experiences of real interaction, which later changes into a mental trial treatment, which is highly automated and can therefore take place unconsciously. It is now central that every object may have such affordances that call for instrumental or epistemic action. In the simplest case, it is the body and the facial expressions of our counterpart that can be understood as a question and provoke an answer/reaction. Thus, emotion is not only to be understood as expression/output according to the scheme ‚input-processing-output’, but acts itself as a provocative act/input. Consequently, artifacts are neither necessary nor sufficient conditions for affordances. Rather, they exist in all areas of cognition—from Enactive Cognition to Social Cognition.","PeriodicalId":33799,"journal":{"name":"Gestalt Theory","volume":"43 1","pages":"179 - 198"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Gestalt Theory","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2478/gth-2021-0016","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Summary Methodological problems often arise when a special case is confused with the general principle. So you will find affordances only for ‚artifacts’ if you restrict the analysis to ‚artifacts’. The general principle, however, is an ‚invitation character’, which triggers an action. Consequently, an action-theoretical approach known as ‚pragmatic turn’ in cognitive science is recommended. According to this approach, the human being is not a passive-receptive being but actively produces those action effects that open up the world to us (through ‚active inferences’). This ‚ideomotor approach’ focuses on the so-called ‚epistemic actions’, which guide our perception as conscious and unconscious cognitions. Due to ‚embodied cognition’ the own body is assigned an indispensable role. The action theoretical approach of ‚enactive cognition’ enables that every form can be consistently processualized. Thus, each ‚Gestalt’ is understood as the process result of interlocking cognitions of ‚forward modelling’ (which produces anticipations and enables prognoses) and ‚inverse modelling’ (which makes hypotheses about genesis and causality). As can be shown, these cognitions are fed by previous experiences of real interaction, which later changes into a mental trial treatment, which is highly automated and can therefore take place unconsciously. It is now central that every object may have such affordances that call for instrumental or epistemic action. In the simplest case, it is the body and the facial expressions of our counterpart that can be understood as a question and provoke an answer/reaction. Thus, emotion is not only to be understood as expression/output according to the scheme ‚input-processing-output’, but acts itself as a provocative act/input. Consequently, artifacts are neither necessary nor sufficient conditions for affordances. Rather, they exist in all areas of cognition—from Enactive Cognition to Social Cognition.
格式塔知觉以及表情和手势中的认知可供性
当特殊情况与一般原则相混淆时,往往会出现方法论问题。因此,如果您将分析限制为“工件”,您将只找到“工件”的可供性。然而,一般原则是“邀请特征”,它会触发行动。因此,建议采用认知科学中被称为“语用转向”的行动理论方法。根据这种方法,人类不是一个被动的接受者,而是主动地产生那些向我们开放世界的行动效果(通过“主动推断”)。这种“意念运动方法”侧重于所谓的“认知行为”,它将我们的感知引导为有意识和无意识的认知。由于“具体认知”,身体被赋予了不可或缺的角色。“行为认知”的行动理论方法使每一种形式都能始终如一地被过程化。因此,每个“格式塔”都被理解为“正向建模”(产生预期并实现预测)和“反向建模”(对成因和因果关系进行假设)相互关联认知的过程结果。可以看出,这些认知是由以前的真实互动经历提供的,这些经历后来转变为心理试验治疗,这是高度自动化的,因此可以在无意识的情况下发生。现在的核心是,每个物体都可能有这样的可供性,需要工具性或认识性的行动。在最简单的情况下,我们的对手的身体和面部表情可以被理解为一个问题,并引发答案/反应。因此,根据“输入-处理-输出”方案,情绪不仅被理解为表达/输出,而且本身也是一种挑衅行为/输入。因此,伪像既不是可供性的必要条件,也不是可供的充分条件。相反,它们存在于认知的各个领域——从激活认知到社会认知。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
32 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信