periphery

[keryx]

There's an article in Go Animal today about peripheral vision. I think it's written all wrong. That is, he has a point, but he goes about his point poorly. There's validity, for instance, in the idea that school is frequently anti-peripheral-thinking (that is, thinking which is global and wide-focused).

Unless I'm just a complete freak, what I think the invention of the cubicle did was make your focus more multi-dimensional. You can't just scan to the sides - you have to go up as well as around (or at least I do). And all the technology he gripes about is in fact supportive of peripheral thinking, metaphorically.

Yeah, well, people who are really excited about food and movement that are good for you are frequently also convinced that progress and industry are evil. It's annoying.

Today I really like the word periphery.

Comments

[baronmind.livejournal.com]

I get the feeling the author hasn't done a whole lot of research on this topic. For instance, he refers to humans as a "prey species" -- but unless I'm mistaken, humans (and other primates) are predators. Prey species, like deer and rabbits, have eyes mounted on opposite sides of their head, to watch in both directions at once; it's only predators who need precise depth perception, and thus the forward-looking eyes.

He also asserts that in today's world, "our peripheral vision becomes increasingly irrelevant and atrophied." The first is a matter of opinion, and may or may not be true -- but the second is rather a bold claim to make. However, he provides no support for this; he simply tosses it out there as if it is a proven fact and moves on. Since his article is predicated upon the assumption that people don't realize their peripheral vision is wasting away, it's clear that at best this is a misuse of the word "atrophy."

He may well have had a point, but since he essentially made up many of his background facts, I'm reluctant to assign any validity to any conclusions he reached.

[keryx.livejournal.com]

That's pretty much his schtick - he reads some random sociobiology, distills it, comes up with a rant, and just throws it out there (which admittedly is more or less what I do). I've sent him a variety of book recommendations in the past that refute some of his key points, so maybe he'll improve over time. When he writes about exercise and food, he's brilliant. When he writes about his utopian vision of cavefolk (a topic he doesn't seem to have researched all that much, either), I generally just ignore it, but the whole "technology is killing us" thing chafes me.

[baronmind.livejournal.com]

What bothers me is that he doesn't admit he's just making it up; he presents it as if it's a fact. I make up random assumptions about how things work all the time, but I always present it as "It seems to me that...", as opposed to "In fact, it is safe to assume." It's not really safe to assume that something some random guy made up based on no information is true. That's exactly the sort of argument that's getting creationism added to science classes in Kansas. "Well, it's safe to assume that these animals didn't all just evolve by themselves!" Could you support that assumption, please?

How has he responded to your book recommendations? Is he appreciative of the correction, or hostile? If it's the former, you may be right; there may be hope for him to improve.

[keryx.livejournal.com]

He was, if I recall, fairly open to the idea of reading something new that might expand his perspective. I have a suspicion that he read "Killing Monsters" (book about how video games and violence actually help us process violence) after I recommended it, because he stopped throwing out random "conventional wisdom"-type comments about how teevee is so bad and scary. But he didn't actually challenge things he'd said in the past, just kinda stopped talking about it.

[luguvalium.livejournal.com]

One of the results of techology is to extend our vision beyond what our peripheral vision can do through the creation of devices that take input from a variety of sources and send it to our focused vision and sometimes our hearing, our strongest senses. Examples: the telescope, television, computers.

I can appreciate the point that its good to take time off from focused vision activities to something else.

[keryx.livejournal.com]

re your sentence: exactly. and plenty of people have published research to support that; i don't know why more people don't go out and read such things.

[libskrat]

Try recommending him Natural Born Cyborgs and see what happens. I suspect he'll read it because he's so horrified by the title -- and then be utterly fascinated.