Today I made assets for this website.

I made these buttons. and these other assets

I was supposed to be continuing my thoughts on agency and writing my papers but I didn't really until later this night. I did however have a lot of fun making these assets.

I can probably finish my absolutely mandatory work tonight if I actually do it.

below is some of the notes I had on Kevin O'Regan and Alva Noë, 'What Is It Like To See: A Sensorimotor Theory of Perceptual Experience' Links to an external site. --- ‘What It Is like to See: A Sensorimotor Theory of Perceptual Experience’ OReganNoe

Physical processes to felt aspects of sensory experience. O Regan Noe describes the feel of driving a porsche and says and notes that in some instances, when you are driving the Porsche, you are not necessarily doing anything in the interaction, but you are still having the experience of driving a Porsche

I think here again with the Porsche driving, we have something which was examined in the software agency literature that I looked at last time, and that is persistence. This reminds me a lot of the waiting EEG potential, Contingent Negative Variation. Maybe there could be a kind of study done with contingent negative variation, which says something for the ideas of persistence in agents. Could this kind of be outside of the temporally extended pattern described a paragraph later?

I am unsure about the comment, “it comes to seem doubtful that the Porsche-driving experience is the sort of thing that can be generated by activity in the brain,” though I know and understand why it is in here. I do like the idea of vision here acting as a give or take within the environment, because it gives me a few questions in analogy with vision. In that see seems to have lots of meanings, including noticing aspects, and experiencing. They do note that experience is not generated in the brain as a solution to the issue of experience being in the brain. I kind of think that’s funny, but I cannot argue against it at this point. I am sure that this will be better explained in the paper, or on this assumption, maybe the point is less to talk about what experience is and instead just elucidate what makes certain experiences physically intertwined in different sorts of ways.

I am a bit hesitant about participating a bit here, but I do think it could be good for clarifying the kinds of thoughts that are necessary for moving around understanding sensory stimuli. I am hesitant because lots of signals show things like unconscious recognition, and you cannot really stop your eyes from seeing, even when you close them, they are just seeing a different thing.

“In the next sections we shall define in greater detail what seeing consists in. We shall distinguish one aspect of the activity of seeing which can be related to what psychologists call "sensation", and one aspect which can be related to what they call "perception". “ Clarifying the plot here

something that has been interesting me recently is the idea of persistence in software agents. This is the idea that you keep the program continuously running in order for it to be able to take action when a host is not present. This reminds me of both the airplane seeking and the driving Porsche example in that your experience seems to be continuous in that it persists even when you are not acting or are not able to get information to work with, necessarily in order to be aware when this information comes without being turned on or something analogous to that in humans. Mastery of sensorimotor contingencies seems to be very much a kind of version of persistence.

Has the Innsbruck inversion experiment but with one eye flipped. I like the idea of mastery residing in the body is something we've talked about before. This is also directly related to the kinds of things in thinking of perception as an exercise of mastery. In that it kind of is being able to be situated in the environment.

maybe something to discuss more would be the binding problem. I am a bit intrested in the problems with association.