]> 2026-06-25T06:22:33+02:00 Annotation:Text:Cybernetics, Experience, and the Concept of Self/Wpqzf5ewks 248 en ^"permissions":^"read":ӶӺ,"update":ӶӺ,"delete":ӶӺ,"admin":ӶӺ°,"user":^"id":6,"name":"Sarah Oberbichler"°,"id":"Wpqzf5ewks","ranges":Ӷ^"start":"/divӶ3Ӻ/divӶ4Ӻ/divӶ1Ӻ/pӶ74Ӻ","startOffset":0,"end":"/divӶ3Ӻ/divӶ4Ӻ/divӶ1Ӻ/pӶ74Ӻ","endOffset":1146°Ӻ,"quote":"Earlier, we asked the question, “What constitutes the invariant object that the organism recognizes?” If we take this question without context, “invariant” clearly could be interpreted in two radically different ways. On the one hand, it could be a prototype, or template, by which the organism categorizes certain experiences as exemplars of the class represented by the invariant. This is the sense of object concept and it was then illustrated by the example from psycholinguistics. On the other hand, the “invariant” could be interpreted as an object in its own right that remains unchanged because it “exists” and is recognized as the selfsame individual every time it enters the organism’s field of experience. This is the sense of “invariant” that corresponds to the conception of object permanence. Both the concept of the object as prototype, with regard to which experiences may be considered equivalent, and the concept of object permanence, as a result of which two or more experiences may be considered to derive from one identical individual, involve a form of invariance. But the invariance is certainly not the same in both cases.","highlights":Ӷ^"jQuery321030334267355695812":^°°Ӻ,"text":"","category":"Argumentation2","data_creacio":1561396463056° 2019-07-24T14:28:57Z 2458689.1034375 2019-07-24T12:28:58Z 2458689.0201157 Text:Cybernetics, Experience, and the Concept of Self/Wpqzf5ewks