I'm very sorry to hear of the passing of Prof. Kuhn. Never met him in
person but I always appreciated what I understood of his 'Structure...'
book.
By the way, I can now offer yet another formulation of the Constructivist
approach I am pursuing: Language Action Theory. That is, language as
action, a la Searle. My source is Winograd & Flores, Understanding
Computers & Cognition.
Now, then, what's wrong with 'reality'? Or what about it catches your
interest / concern / construing? I'd be interested to hear, and I
promise to respond with my own ideas and reactions.
Thanks.
Gary
>James Mancuso wrote:
>
> Gary:
>
> Thanks for the citation on perception.
>
> There are other citations that one might reference.
>
> I should note that whenever I taught a course I would use a
> ploy
> something like this -- "We won't start with a definition of COGNITION.
> Whatever you take out of studying the material we will study in this
> course
> will be YOUR definition of COGNITION."
>
> If I were teaching a course on PERCEPTION, I would be most
> pleased
> if all of the students would end the course assiduously avoiding the
> use of
> the term REALITY.
>
> By the way -- THE NEW YORK TIMES, this morning, announced the
> death
> of Thomas Kuhn.
>
> Jim Mancuso
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%