Barbara Tversky | Spatial Thinking is the Foundation of Thought

[@SEMF]

00:00:00 INTRODUCTION 00:02:13 Neural coding of space: place cells and grid cells 00:04:54 Thought comes from abstracting actions in space 00:07:03 Overview of the talk 00:07:33 World in mind: thinking physical spatiality 00:08:26 Mind in world: aplying spatial thinking 00:11:00 Space and meaning 00:12:42 Unique features of space 00:14:20 THINKING PHYSICAL SPATIALITY 00:14:23 The own body 00:16:39 The space nearby 00:18:20 Big spaces: orientation, distances, maps 00:27:11 Perspective (reference frame) 00:29:10 APLYING SPATIAL THINKING 00:29:56 Learning through own spatial gestures 00:36:13 Teaching through spatial gestures 00:39:44 Learning through visual explanations 00:42:00 Graphics 00:43:39 Ancient maps across cultures 00:47:22 Ancient representations of time 00:49:52 Ancient representations of numbers 00:52:02 Applications of maps and graphics 00:57:24 Orderings, categories and patterns 01:00:14 Diagramming the world

[@hmichaelpower]

Fascinating despite or because of high density of information At about 31 minutes the person trying to understand the spatial information draws it out with their hands in the air. This reminded me of ballet dancers mentally rehearsing a sequence of movements with their hands mimicking the moves.

[@looseunit9180]

Fantastic presentation! Really appreciate that you have posted this. So many points of departure for exploration and creative thought 🙏🏻

[@SEMF]

That´s our intention with our mission at SEMF! Thanks for your comment!

[@Thejosiphas]

this is such a cool talk! i am a mathematician and i would drawn a similar conclusion about the relationship between spacial thinking and algebra. not only is every equation dual with a geometric picture (not always directly visualizable though) but even algebra itself is completely rooted in spacial thinking. for instance, we write equations rows and even though that might not seem that important to the actual algebra, the fact that we often distinguish multiplication on the left from multiplication on the right shows that the spacial way equations are written cannot be untangled from the way that the algebra works. another great example of how algebra depends on spacial thinking is the matrix from linear algebra in which numbers are written in a grid and the spacial locations of these numbers within the grid has surprising properties

[@kodfkdleepd2876]

Surely you know about category theory. Category theory is pure structure (it's basically graph theory and abstract algebra put together) and underlies all math(it's just the right amount of structure to express everything we do in math). Clearly calculus is very "spatial". The real line is literally a mock up of distance and so of space. Linear algebra is literally the study of transformations on vector spaces so no doubt it will be connected to space. I think though if you stop and think about it, it is actually quite obvious that our brains are spacial processing units(maybe not directly but using some type of spatial structures). After all, before language all we could do was move around. So our brains developed spatial processing from the get go... spoken language came after, then written... these are far more abstract and sequential. Language itself is full of spatial concepts and surely it started out as an augmentation of spatial gesturing. When you want to communicate with someone and don't know their language you point. Pointing(vectors) is the most basic form of communication and is universal. This is how we teach kids. Point point point. Space, as we know it, is simply a vector space(or possibly manifold). Again, I don't think it's as surprising as it might seem. What is surprising is just how evolved and convoluted our development of such "simple" things is. We now deal with category theory which underlies topology, calculus, algebra, number theory, etc. Even in math there are basically two domains: Combinatorics and Continuity: Counting and Motion. It's not coincidence. We can't help it. Algebra is just an abstraction over arithmetic. Arithmetic mainly started in counting and in building/construction. What is important to understand is the levels of abstraction that man has done over the millennia and how it works itself out(it's effectively a topology or simplicial category). I don't think it is coincidental... in fact, it is almost necessary. We are either bound by space and time because that is all there is or bound by it because our "biological machinery" can't comprehend anything else. When one peels back the hood everything we are expressing is relations(hips) and relations are spatial in nature(even if just binary representing on and off).

[@kodfkdleepd2876]

Also, mathematics is all about maps(category are based only on the idea of maps). Maps are everything. Maps is what guide us, allow us to remember, and allow us to communicate. The function is a map and you should know how ubiquitous they are in math, it's true in music, all of science(obviously), painting, etc. Every graphic, every character, every word, every emotion, etc is a map.

[@RollingTree2]

Good stuff ...thanks for sharing! Would be interesting to hear about or delve into graphics vs words as communication tool at societal scale in terms of prevelance, categories, gender, tech level, as well as the corespondence or not re words/graphics in terms of thinking (internal) vs communication (external) and why there is such an overwhelming bias to words as the primary external/communication mode/tool (ease/simplicity/familiarity/skill set requirements perhaps). Temple Grandin has touched on some interesting things re individual variances in inclination to visual vs word thinking modes/tendencies. Excited to read Tversky's book! The "motion" aspect/emphasis is particularly interesting and surprising.

[@SEMF]

Thanks for such a thoughtful comment! You are welcome to join the discussion in our online community. You can join freely by following this link: semf.org.es/participate/join.html

[@franklillehagen9331]

The foundation of our knowledge spaces are our practical workspaces. Our mental models are composed of reflective views created in our workspaces.

[@SEMF]

Interesting take, how much influence do you think our physiology/anatomy has in shaping our knowledge spaces?

[@rustybolts8953]

Just tested one of your statements that right handed people feel or express value more with the right hand than left hand. I reached out my right hand then my left while visualizing a block of gold in each hand after the other. To my surprise I felt a far greater sense of value from the imaginary gold in my right hand than my left hand. Several tries produced the same feeling.

[@SEMF]

These are very interesting introspective experiments!

[@rustybolts8953]

Just used your concepts to visualize infinity. Allowing my hand to move freely first my right hand drew a spiral moving outward then my left. Then both hands interacted creating multi-directional spirals merging into each other, then separating again then merging into one with one union of two hands clasped as one. This for me has implication as to the deeper nature of infinity. A new way to think. Thank you Barbara...

[@SEMF]

These are very interesting introspective experiments!

[@jeplica7011]

I have severe discalcula and left and right, push pull in out up down is incredibly difficult to apply efficiently while working with my hands. Measuring cutting using tools . Its really hard

[@thoughtfuloutsider]

This is exciting because as a dancer I've had this feeling of what called the geography of thought and feeling. Years ago I had a stroke that only effected my left side which led to a couple epileptic seizures a year later. I've never had any again. 7 years without another one. I feel the possibility sometimes but manage then using spatial thinking.

[@SEMF]

That's a fascinating story! Thanks for sharing that insight with our community.

[@Nah_Bohdi]

Neat.

[@zacsamuel7295]

wow ... where did you understand these things? Can we access the study path?

[@SEMF]

Is that a question for Barbara?

[@tostane]

Thinking starts with HAIR as infants in the womb we are covered with hair for a brief time this is the first 3d input to the brain. if you suffer a head injury to recover you may have to stimulate all the hair sensors on the body to try to reconnect the memories in the brain.

[@thoughtfuloutsider]

Is out external perception of our body in space primarily visual and in relation to others and feedback from the world... I agree internal is primarily kinaesthetic proprioception

[@kimauger4293]

Red & Magenta @ approx 22:25 - I think people see all variations of red falling under red because red, as a pigment, is the foundational color to create the others. Magenta does not exist without red. Red is the primary color. Magenta does not make other colors, it is a variation of red created by adding blue, another primary color. It's likely that people learned this at a very early age and then orient anything related to color in this way.

[@SEMF]

Thanks for the clarification!

[@RSEFX]

This is very re-watchable, since it covers a great deal of territory in a short space of time (uh, none of that sentence was/is intended as "clever-ish" wordplay, but it accidentally DOES sorta demonstrate various things touched on here).

[@SEMF]

That's what we intend when hosting conferences: rewatchability. These are great ideas that need to be shared and distributed.

[@RSEFX]

And, of course, people in Michigan have that very handy map of their state and their location within it always on hand (I'm sure this "pun" needs no further extrapolations!). ;-7 Interesting talk, suggesting we all can take another look at our surroundings and how we've arranged it, or how it has been arranged for us. (I wonder how hoarders who live in swirls of entangled, spaghetti-like piles of nearly incomprehensible physical objects and random chaotic shapes all stacked together, many items purchased from both recent as well as older times, ie old and new stuff non-linearly enmeshed--- perceive their world?)

[@RathboneLevy207]

Did useful abstractions exist before the written/drawn word? 2D makes for a great data saving abstraction to 3D space but could it be different if we had different senses and maybe what we call spatial thinking would have different boundaries? Anyway, lovely talk. Very insightful. Thank you so much for doing this!

[@SEMF]

It was our privilege to host Barbara, we are glad you enjoyed it! On your question: It certainly seems possible that useful abstractions existed before the written word; the spoken word has many of the abstraction properties of the written word and it certainly predates any written language.

[@ZapataCarratala]

I do think abstractions predate the written word. A good example are totems of fictional beings (such as chimeric animals) that were carved in wood and had a role in the rituals and belief systems of early humans.

[@kodfkdleepd2876]

Is it not obvious? A picture is worth a thousand words. Language is artificial(words have no innate meaning) and requires much more work to comprehend, is far more ambiguous, and must be understood sequentially(requiring far more memory, patience, and attention). Our brains clearly developed spatial reasoning and memory to a much higher degree because that is how the world is structured. Natural language is not natural. What sequential language offers is repeatability, precision, and recording. Our languages encode spatial concepts and clearly the first uses of language were gestures that were reinforcing spatial constructs. Clearly over time language become more general and more abstract since it has the capacity to express more(it is easy to form a complete spoken and written language but difficult or impossible to form a complete language of gestures). All communication is that of direction. One can work at the "binary level" and point to things or use higher level language to "point" in a much more sophisticated way. Ultimately we seem to translate all sequential language in to spatial structures although it seems there is probably some structure within the brain that has developed to start to work directly at the sequential language level. That is, we can remember text but it is not natural. In fact, it is not spatial structure that we remember(e.g., a Cartesian map) so much as it is a relative structure. Music is a language that seems to be a sort of hybrid in which it enables one to far more easily remember sequential language. This is likely though due to music itself being sequential and somehow it actives more of the brain. It is far easier to memorize/recall 1k's notes(including articulations, dynamics, etc) of a sonata than one might think and the brain seems to do it naturally. Even though music is extremely abstract the brain can effortlessly memorize everything in a sequential fashion(it can be hard for many musicians to try and recall part of a musical piece while it is easy to perform it from start to finish as if it's a "cascading" event(each current recall triggers the next part to be recalled)).

[@SEMF]

Thank you for your insightful comment!

[@thoughtfuloutsider]

Has research check the values associated with space been checked cross culturally? The space time relationship, such as where future and past lie in relation to the body, front back, which sides, differs culturally and from person to person, as an example.

[@SEMF]

That's an interesting suggestion!

[@marshalmcdonald7476]

Good question. I think its interesting that when we look straight ahead we can see what is happening--similarly we can 'see' what happened in the past. Whereas behind us, where we can't see, is like the future, which we 'can't see'. Hm.....

[@SEMF]

@@marshalmcdonald7476 That's a good way to put it.

[@brucecmoore2881]

Is this absolutely True; that is, spacial thinking is the foundation. It seems to me, that things in the World are there at the same time, or one after another(this includes duration or whiling, for instance 'Day and Night' or 'Breakfast'). Read Kant's Critique of Pure Reason and also read the many commentaries on the Critique by Martin Heidegger.

[@SEMF]

Many great suggestions!

[@pwcrabb5766]

Good Grief. Do people actually get paid for this?

[@SEMF]

What do you mean? Paying for Barbara's work in general or for this talk in particular? Her contribution was voluntary for the Spacious spatiality event.

[@kimauger4293]

This research is very important to understanding how people learn and communicate.