Editing Annotation:The Concepts of Adaptation and Viability in a Radical Constructivist Theory of Knowledge/Crvr6cy1yd
Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
The edit can be undone.
Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then save the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
This page supports semantic in-text annotations (e.g. "[[Is specified as::World Heritage Site]]") to build structured and queryable content provided by Semantic MediaWiki. For a comprehensive description on how to use annotations or the #ask parser function, please have a look at the getting started, in-text annotation, or inline queries help pages.
| Latest revision | Your text | ||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
|AnnotationOf=The_Concepts_of_Adaptation_and_Viability_in_a_Radical_Constructivist_Theory_of_Knowledge | |AnnotationOf=The_Concepts_of_Adaptation_and_Viability_in_a_Radical_Constructivist_Theory_of_Knowledge | ||
|AnnotationComment=Es gibt keinen Ausweg aus der Annahme, dass Organismen ihre Welt konstruieren. | |AnnotationComment=Es gibt keinen Ausweg aus der Annahme, dass Organismen ihre Welt konstruieren. | ||
| − | |LastModificationDate=2019- | + | |LastModificationDate=2019-03-29T16:35:50.496Z |
|LastModificationUser=User:Sarah Oberbichler | |LastModificationUser=User:Sarah Oberbichler | ||
| − | |AnnotationMetadata=^"permissions":^"read":ӶӺ,"update":ӶӺ,"delete":ӶӺ,"admin":ӶӺ°,"user":^"id":6,"name":"Sarah Oberbichler"°,"id":"Crvr6cy1yd","ranges":Ӷ^"start":"/divӶ3Ӻ/divӶ4Ӻ/divӶ1Ӻ/pӶ6Ӻ","startOffset":329,"end":"/divӶ3Ӻ/divӶ4Ӻ/divӶ1Ӻ/pӶ7Ӻ","endOffset":326°Ӻ,"quote":"If the individual belongs to our culture and is of a scientific bent, he or she will not be satisfied with introspection but will begin to observe other organisms in order to find out how these organisms come to know their environment, which they tacitly but erroneously equate with the world (von Glasersfeld, 1976). Because one cannot really get inside the organism that is being observed, one eventually formulates or builds some kind of a model of this process of “knowing.” That is what students of perception and the neurosciences in general have been doing and are doing. According to the more or less accepted contemporary models, there are “receptors,” “firings,” and “neural networks” or “fields” that compute a “representation” out of the firings. In the present context we can say that it is irrelevant whether or not the investigator then claims that the organism’s representation is functionally equivalent to, isomorphic with, or, simply, a picture of “the real world” —whatever an observer says of it, there can be no doubt about the fact that the organism has to construct a representation out of such proximal data as it has. In the case of the neuronal model these proximal data are small elementary events referred to as “firings of neurons.” As Hebb (1958) wrote: “At a certain level of physiological analysis there is no reality but the firing of single neurons Ӷp. 461Ӻ.”\nIt seems, then, that there is simply no way around the assumption that organisms construct their representations of their world, their environment, or whatever one chooses to call what is outside them. In other words, an activity of construction has to be assumed regardless of whether one wants to be a constructivist or not.","highlights":Ӷ^" | + | |AnnotationMetadata=^"permissions":^"read":ӶӺ,"update":ӶӺ,"delete":ӶӺ,"admin":ӶӺ°,"user":^"id":6,"name":"Sarah Oberbichler"°,"id":"Crvr6cy1yd","ranges":Ӷ^"start":"/divӶ3Ӻ/divӶ4Ӻ/divӶ1Ӻ/pӶ6Ӻ","startOffset":329,"end":"/divӶ3Ӻ/divӶ4Ӻ/divӶ1Ӻ/pӶ7Ӻ","endOffset":326°Ӻ,"quote":"If the individual belongs to our culture and is of a scientific bent, he or she will not be satisfied with introspection but will begin to observe other organisms in order to find out how these organisms come to know their environment, which they tacitly but erroneously equate with the world (von Glasersfeld, 1976). Because one cannot really get inside the organism that is being observed, one eventually formulates or builds some kind of a model of this process of “knowing.” That is what students of perception and the neurosciences in general have been doing and are doing. According to the more or less accepted contemporary models, there are “receptors,” “firings,” and “neural networks” or “fields” that compute a “representation” out of the firings. In the present context we can say that it is irrelevant whether or not the investigator then claims that the organism’s representation is functionally equivalent to, isomorphic with, or, simply, a picture of “the real world” —whatever an observer says of it, there can be no doubt about the fact that the organism has to construct a representation out of such proximal data as it has. In the case of the neuronal model these proximal data are small elementary events referred to as “firings of neurons.” As Hebb (1958) wrote: “At a certain level of physiological analysis there is no reality but the firing of single neurons Ӷp. 461Ӻ.”\nIt seems, then, that there is simply no way around the assumption that organisms construct their representations of their world, their environment, or whatever one chooses to call what is outside them. In other words, an activity of construction has to be assumed regardless of whether one wants to be a constructivist or not.","highlights":Ӷ^"jQuery321050088968346891672":^°°,^"jQuery321050088968346891672":^°°,^"jQuery321050088968346891672":^°°,^"jQuery321050088968346891672":^°°,^"jQuery321050088968346891672":^°°,^"jQuery321050088968346891672":^°°,^"jQuery321050088968346891672":^°°,^"jQuery321050088968346891672":^°°,^"jQuery321050088968346891672":^°°,^"jQuery321050088968346891672":^°°Ӻ,"text":"Es gibt keinen Ausweg aus der Annahme, dass Organismen ihre Welt konstruieren. ","order":"mw-content-text","category":"Argument","data_creacio":1553873750484° |
}} | }} | ||
