The Application of Feeling -- Christopher Alexander

[@TheBloxDev]

Love listening to him talk. His books are amazing. RIP

[@TheUltimateGeminiHasSurvived]

RIP GOAT

[@urbanology]

The notions of 'objective' and 'subjective' are heavily discussed in the natural sciences. People are often surprised to learn that these are not technical terms, but rather considerations to be grappled with. Originally, an object is something seen, and a subject is someone seeing. But isn't a feeling or thought something real, that we can study objectively? Don't our subjective biases interfere with experimentation and observation? If I observe my own experience, is that subjective or objective? If someone reports their experience to me, isn't their report subjective, but the report's existence is objective, and my interpretation of it is subjective? Clearly we need to agree upon criteria for making progress in any complex scientific endeavor of this sort. Is it an objective or a subjective experience when I look into a light and have an afterimage on my retina? No one else can see the afterimage on my retina, but we assume that the experience exists, that it has a cause, that we can build enlightening theories about the experience and test them, and further investigate them. The study of all psychological phenomena must consider these issues if they are to make any progress, and many of the natural sciences need to constantly consider the influence of the observer on the observed. So Alexander is assuming that when someone says that something has 'life', or 'feeling', we can first assume that their experience is definitely real. Secondly, the stimuli that result in those experiences are definitely real. So the system that we're studying is the 'impression'. The structure of the stimuli, and the structure of the innate and developmental faculties in the brain that are responding, are then subjects of research. He found that, under particular conditions, the use of these descriptors in particular impressions is consistent with high correlation. This opens more questions, of course. This is a complex topic.

[@carlemory6188]

I know Im randomly asking but does someone know a method to get back into an Instagram account?? I somehow forgot my login password. I would love any tips you can give me!

[@santiagoluca8183]

@Carl Emory instablaster =)

[@carlemory6188]

@Santiago Luca I really appreciate your reply. I found the site thru google and Im trying it out now. Takes a while so I will get back to you later when my account password hopefully is recovered.

[@carlemory6188]

@Santiago Luca it did the trick and I finally got access to my account again. I'm so happy! Thanks so much, you saved my account !

[@santiagoluca8183]

@Carl Emory Happy to help xD

[@urbanology]

Here's a natural science perspective on investigating the objectivity of perceiving 'life': www.rainmagazine.com/archive/2015/living-structure-and-cognition

[@AdamChmurzynski-rk9lw]

Where can the full interview be found?

[@urbanology]

The original tape had many technical problems, so I won't upload the whole thing. The one long section left involves a particular housing project at the University of Oregon. I'm making a video that will incorporate that material.

[@urbanology]

There is another snippet from this interview here: kzbin.info/www/bejne/kHW4nXpseph_ptk

[@AdamChmurzynski-rk9lw]

Just wanted to say that I'm making my way through the Nature of Order (on Book 2), I feel very touched by this work and this family of ideas, I think what you're doing is very important.

[@donokeefe3960]

"It was very objectively visible" that is was not harmonious? No, it wasn't. You cannot prove it, therefore it is not objective. Try this one: "Everyone at the community meeting agreed that Picasso was a bad artist. They said that he was bad because paintings should be realistic. That wasn't a good reason, but they were still right, but it was "very objectively visible" that he was bad." The reason people try to come up with bogus reasons which sound objective is because our society increasingly recognizes the value of empiricism. Christopher Alexander is a philistine.

[@Tidnull]

When Alexander refers to qualities of harmony, order, and wholeness in buildings and man made things, I think he means that the objectivity is derived through consensus of human opinion. On the contrary, empiricism is based on experimental verification, correct?

[@evanhadkins5532]

If something is observed, it is observed by a subject. Subjective and objective are analytical.

[@seanankerr2864]

"the wise man bowed his head solemnly and spoke: "theres actually zero difference between good & bad things. you imbecile. you f***ing moron""

[@carrottoponcrak]

Don O'Keefe. haha, you obviously didn't read his books

[@myotherusername9224]

@donokeefe3960 what is your definition of 'philistine' and how does that fit CA ?