Locating the Inexhaustible: Material, Medium, and Ambient Information

10Citations
Citations of this article
17Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

The fundamental difference between the enactive approach and Gibson’s ecological approach lies in the view toward our shared environment. For Varela et al. (1991), a pregiven environment that exists “out there” is incompatible with the worlds enacted by various histories of life. For Gibson (1979/2015), the environment with its unlimited possibilities that exists out there offers many ways of life. Drawing on the recent empirical studies on the mechanical basis of information and pattern formation in a wide range of fields, this paper illustrates a principle regarding how pattern and change that are formed in an environmental medium, under certain conditions, could serve as the reservoir of information that makes available a variety of opportunities for perception. The second part of this paper offers a discussion about how the consideration of the materials that make up the terrestrial environment—the particles in the atmosphere and the textured surfaces—led Gibson to replace the concept of “space” with the notion of “medium” that allows for the open-ended activities of perception. Finally, I argue that given due consideration of the ambient information available in the medium, the apparent incompatibility between the world independent of the perceiver that exist out there and the worlds enacted by various histories of life could be resolved.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Nonaka, T. (2020, March 13). Locating the Inexhaustible: Material, Medium, and Ambient Information. Frontiers in Psychology. Frontiers Media S.A. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00447

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free