Theme 3: Comments

Hello there! We too discussed the correlation between theory and hypothesis during our seminar and as you say there is not any consensus of what theory. That lack of consensus became pretty clear during our seminar since we had different interpretations and understandings of the concept. My standpoint aligns with the arguments you present here. Nevertheless, I do not agree with or fully comprehend what you mean that "it might not be relevant to get an overview of the concept Theory." Did you feel that this theme was excessive and unnecessary or just that the determination of what theory is hard to make? That it might be sufficient to have heard of the concept of theory but not to understand it to the core, due to the lack of consensus?

(link to comment on blogpost)

Theme 4: Quantitative methods - Post-reflection

The seminar for theme 4 on quantitative methods gave a better understanding of the distinction between quantitative and qualitative methods. Even though the basic difference is pretty clear, it is hard to draw the line where the transition occurs. A quantitative method is statistical and enables statistical analysis of some kind, often by using questionnaires. It is used to indicate a trend or generalisations within the field and done under uncontrolled conditions. Qualitative methods on the other hand is non-statistical and intended for deeper understanding of one specific topic.

During the seminar we discussed that qualitative methods are often conducted within psychology and humanistic fields since these topics are not as suited for collecting data and statistical analysis. Also how design problems often falls within the framework for qualitative methods. Ilias presented this as Wicked Problems; they can not really be answered quantitatively since they are often built on opinions. Thereby they are instead solved through design research. We discussed the example for designing a new mobile device. It is difficult to find new and innovative ideas through statistical analysis. You could find trend of what people do not buy but not what they need and want per se. Even if it could be possible it would be much more time consuming than a qualitative research method.

We also discussed how the project methods performed as a basis for his article were purely quantitative. Even though some of the preparations before the testing the simulated drumming experience where of qualitative measure, not mentioned in the article but acknowledged by Ilias, the actual tests and data collected was only quantitative. The reason for this was according to Ilias that they did not want to, or at least minimize, influence on their subjects during the tests which quantitative methods fulfill.

In contrast to the pure quantitative method of Ilias experiment we conversed about research questions that were mainly or solely qualitative. Generally, a topic of this kind would be any with non-statistical character and preferably consisting of interviews within an area that debates opinions. An example of a clear qualitative research question that one participant recalled from having heard the story before. The investigation of heavy metal listeners opinions concerning sexual-orientations.  

Theme 5: Design Research - Pre-reflection

1. How can media technologies be evaluated?

Media technologies is best evaluated by use of the users. Since they are developed for the user it is crucial that they meet the user’s needs. This means that usability is an important matter that needs close attention. Usability includes effectiveness, efficiency and satisfaction as Haibo Li et. al. describe in their article. These key factors must be met for the media technology to succeed. To investigate how a new technology performs within these terms a common and well functioning way is to use interactive mockups that give the testers an idea of how the final product will work, how it will perform and how you interact with it.

2. What role will prototypes play in research?

Prototypes hold a very important role in research since they, as briefly described above, give the users an idea of what the product is to be. By presenting the basics of a new technology, the users will get insight and easier be constructive with what needs to be further developed and what needs to go. Prototypes can also be useful as you look back on your process and all the steps you took to reach the final goal.

3. Why could it be necessary to develop a proof of concept prototype?

The proof of concept, POC, prototype is constructed with the purpose to demonstrate and verify the concept and what it will become. This is to better present and understand how it will play in before launch which then tells you whether or not the technology is ready for the market. This prevents or at least decreases the risk for releasing a product too early.

4. What are characteristics and limitations of prototypes?

A prototype is a simplistic version of the final product. It is mainly used to give users an idea of what the final thing will be and simulate a function, or all, before it is all done. It enables for more discussion about what alterations should be done to constantly strive for best possible outcome. A limitation could be that the prototypes fails to replicate the final product, giving the users the wrong idea instead of enhancing it. This could both create confusion of what is really intended to develop as well as slow down the design process.

5. How can design research be communicated/presented?

The design research itself is used to show and investigate how the product is to be developed. It can be communicated through prototyping since this is an effective way of showing yor process and thoughts behind the project.

What is the 'empirical data' in these two papers?

In the article Finding Design Qualities in a Tangible Programming Space by Ylva Fernaeus and Jakob Tholander, it is investigated on how design qualities can affect and be coordinated as a tangible programming space for children. The empirical data retrieved constituted of observations done during the children’s interaction with their predeveloped tangible programming space that allowed the children to collaboratively create a dynamic playful environment.

The article Differentiated Driving Range: Exploring a Solution to the Problems with the “Guess-O-Meter” in Electric Cars has a standpoint that tries to

They began with conducting a state of the art analysis through searching the web for information of how different user interfaces were designed in different car models and also how these designs were discussed and reviewed on blog posts and videos. To elaborate these notions of views, they did an analysis of the discourse on online forums. Finally, an iterative design exploration was included to gain further insight in the problems. Through sketches and prototypes they were able to test and analyze interaction and draw conclusions.

- Can practical design work in itself be considered a 'knowledge contribution'?

In theory, one could work with a practical design process without any outer evaluation. Despite this lacking logic, not having any input during the design process but your own, it could be done. If that work would then be used and as a base for further development, with other and more participants and/or subjects aiding the process, it would be considered knowledge contribution.

- Are there any differences in design intentions within a research project, compared to design in general?

Depending on your research question the intention will most likely be different. In a research project your goal is to answer a specific research question for further research or design alternatives. Imagine Apple, they have a research team looking for out of the box ideas for future implementation into their product line. That process requires a research project with a design goal in mind. Meanwhile, they also develop new products that have already been researched, hence not requiring that step, but merely just requires being developed and launched. Thereby, the design intentions differ.

- Is research in tech domains such as these ever replicable? How may we account for aspects such as time/historical setting, skills of the designers, available tools, etc?

Without any doubt I’d say. Since tech, so far, never stops evolving and developing as well as that our interactions and engagement habits vary from day to day, any study that would be conducted once again would most likely give differents outputs. Even more so the longer time passes between the two studies.

- Are there any important differences with design driven research compared to other research practices?

The firstmost thought is that there is a significant difference between design driven research versus any other research practice. The reason being, similar to the question before, how our habits and routines constantly change. Interaction behaviours might come and go but are rarely very extant during each cycle. Furthermore, a design driven research is almost exclusively of qualitative manner. This is due to the research being of emotional values and within humanistic fields where opinions matters.

Theme 2: Comments

Hi!

I completly agree with you that there has to be a balance in how we view and percieve the world, otherwise it would really be kind of dull and static as you say! And yes, media is truly powerful. Often more so than governments, at least more influential. You have probably seen the clip but I must mention it anyhow. When Hans Rosling visits a Danish news studio and lectures him in how the world works. There he explicitly says that you cannot use media to learn about the world. Not to be blind and trust all that is said by the journalists and news anchors.
Regarding your last sentence, do you mean that a reproduction can serve the same purpose as an original? Would you say that reproductions indifferent substitues that fulfill the same need and feel despite loosing their "aura" as claimed in the texts? Might the aura only be lost to those who are truly educated and versed in art?

(link to comment)

Theme 4: Quantitative research - Pre-reflection

Chosen article:

An exploratory study of factors influencing repurchase behaviors toward game items: A field study
Lee, J., Lee, J., Lee, H., Lee, J., Computers in Human Behaviour 53 (2015) 13-23. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0747563215004574


This article studies what factors influence online game item purchases and especially repurchase behaviours. The intention is to understand what factors that trigger a repurchasing behaviour of online game items. To accomplish this the authors base their research on 2,060,685 observations of online game purchases made from a game company. The observations revealed various different factors that affected purchasing behaviours such as recency of purchase, purchase frequency and purchase cycle. These findings lead to the statement that “unconscious” purchase behaviours, immersion, impulse purchases and habits, should be further analyzed.


The main quantitative method used in this this article was, as briefly described above, the massive about of observations and statistics of online purchases acquired from the game company. By using this method, the paper gained a new perspective to the area of online game purchasing behaviours since this was the first time a highly statistical method was used. Similar and earlier studies had mainly used questionnaires or qualitative methods such as interviews. But due to the load of data that was collected, the authors were able to see other trends and draw new conclusions to how purchasing behaviours appear. The downside with questionnaire is that there is no guarantee that the subjects answer 100 % correct since their perception of their purchases might not actually concur with the actual purchase behaviour.


What limited this study was that the game company they received data from, actually had a database of 84,434,287 observations from online game purchases. That is more than 40 times more observations than what was actually used and there was no explanation why they had limited their study to only 2,060,685 observations. If the entire amount of observations had been used, the results had of course been more precise. The trends and conclusions the paper reached might even had looked different. It would also have been interesting to see statistics from another game company. By only using this one, the data was obviously quite narrow and thereby inclined the results.


Drumming in Immersive Virtual Reality

The paper conducted a study of how react to and behave when exposed to and interacting with an Immersive Virtual Reality (IVR). That is, virtual reality taken one step further, giving the user a deeper experience through, in this case, a new personal body or bodily characteristics. This body replaces your and stimulates your own, real life body, as you interact in the virtual reality. All with the intention to create a higher sense of “being there”.


The key points of the paper was to investigate who this kind of interaction affects us. And more precisely, if our virtual representation of a body differs from our real body as well as if or when we interact with objects typically more associated with that new and varying body. Even though I’ve tried VR before and at one occasion even IVR with a simulated body I can not relate to feeling any substantial behavioural difference or even cognitive consequences as found in some cases of their study. At least not any variations that I was aware of. But after having read and thought about this experiment, I think that the next time I experience IVR, my awareness of what I am experiencing will be different and that my interaction might adapt to what I interacting with in the virtual reality.


Before choosing whether to use quantitative or qualitative methods for your research, you should investigate what you plan to achieve. A quantitative method constitutes of large numbers of data, often without any particular selection. It is used to generalize results from a sample of the entire dataset which is then used to construct a statistical analysis. That analysis can often indicate trends and thereby point towards a final course of action. Qualitative methods, are instead based on few but thorough investigations, often in the form of interviews. These methods are used to gain a deeper understanding for motives, thoughts and opinions. The findings are seldom conclusive and are not suitable to serve as a representation or generalization within the topic. Instead, the qualitative methods can be used to indicate the next step, what needs further investigation.

Theme 3: Research and theory - Post-reflection

During the lecture and followed up at our seminar discussions we identified different types of theories. The most common scientific theory that is well confirmed by the currently modern methods of science. It is motivated by consistency and can always be explained and measured. The other larger type of theory is philosophical theories, that is not based in empirical data but solely in people’s conviction; hence not being false until proven so, according to scientific measures.

Furthermore we discussed theories correlation to hypotheses and found it to be very close. Sometimes even hard to determine whether a topic, observation or experience is theory or hypothesis. The conclusion of our discussion, based on what we interpreted from the lecture, was that it is all objective and dependent on our presuppositions and previous experiences. For example we discussed the image of a frozen, snowy forest that Leif showed us during the lecture. In our context, in Sweden and where most of us if not all in that lecture hall are also brought up in Sweden, our first thought is that the image is of a frozen, snowy forest. The theory around that image is unified. On the other hand, if the image would have been shown in a classroom in Africa or a place on earth where snow never falls and the citizens have never experienced it, the interpretations would have differed. They might even have claimed that the trees and ground was painted in white. In that context, that would have been their theory. This comes down to our conclusion of our discussion that theories are hypotheses until scientifically proven, philosophically agreed upon which in itself takes us to our core thought: if enough people within a context are unified and convinced about a phenomena, it turns into theory for them.

However, during the group discussion with the entire class this distinction was not entirely agreed upon. Rather we said that a hypothesis is: concise formulation of a particular expectation that you then experiment within. Hypotheses need not build on a theory and can be tested and determined whether true or false. Also, theories are not necessarily divided into different types but something abstract we construct in order to enhance our understanding of the world. Nevertheless, Leif said during his lecture that “Theory is a coherent reasoning for explaining phenomena and is used until proven inapplicable by another theory. [...] it can take a long time to convince people that a new theory is valid and should replace the old theory.”, a statement that is in line with our initial reasoning. Leif also said that there are different views on what theory is, which could hence describe our varying opinions during the open class discussion.

The divergence we got round up in however, regarding what defined theory, when sitting in the smaller groups, was a mix up of theory and truth. While theory is as discussed above, truth is something a unified crowd believes in and is convinced about. Take religion as an example. Even though we have never been able to find any evidence or proof of a higher force or God, people still believe there is one. Yet they live by and consider religion as truth.

Theme 1: Comments

Hello,

I too, like you, had a clouded mind regarding the message Kant wanted to mediate with his Critique for Pure Reason prior to the seminar. But your reasoning shows that a week spent wondering and pondering at the lecture and seminar gave you a better understanding of the texts. That space and time comes inherently to each person does seem obvious and in line with Kant's reasoning. But an interesting thought to debate this with is: imagine an infant child being held in solitude from any outer stimuli, culture or upbringing, would this child still gain the same perception of space and time? Would the child learn to walk (a question we discussed during our seminar) or what skills would s/he develop? Would s/he inherit the same skills as any other child or would it differ due to the complete separation?

Link to commented blog post

Theme 2: Critical media studies - Post-reflections

This week's theme was slightly harder to fully comprehend compared to the of theme 1. We began with reading Benjamin and Adorno & Horkheimer. Two texts which concepts I was unable to follow to the same extent as Kant and Plato’s reasoning. As we proceeded with the lecture by Håkan, the understanding came successively. But it wasn’t until, or rather after, the seminar that I felt I could grasp the concepts sufficiently.

During the seminar we mainly discussed the text by Benjamin and the questions we had on his works. Nominalism was one concept in Benjamin’s text and also debated during the seminar. It is a view in which the only thing objects have in common is the name. Within nominalism there are furthermore two branches. One argues that there is no such thing as universals. Plato wrote about a realm of universals apart from the world as we know it. This means that all physical objects we perceive are only projections of these universals. The nominalist denies these universals. The other denies all kinds of abstract objects.

While discussing nominalism we also considered realism. Håkan used the allegory of the cave by Plato to give an illustrative representative example. Plato’s cave is an allegory, image below, that imagines a couple of individuals imprisoned in a cave since their birth. In short, all these prisoners know and have even experienced are shadows of passing “puppets” (horses and merchants etc) projected on the inner wall of the cave. Projections that have become their reality since they have never experienced the world outside of the cave. So even though the world outside exists, it is not part of the prisoners reality. One prisoner was released and given the possibility to experience the real world, he then returned to his fellow prisoners to tell them about the experience but they only saw him as yet another shadow and didn’t understand what he was saying since they knew nothing apart from those shadows on the wall; that was their only reality.



We also discussed how our perception of objects are determined. Either they are naturally determined or historically determined. Naturally determined are objects of permanent nature while historically determined is more open to interpretation and can vary as time passes and we gain more experiences. The distinction between the two turned out to be harder than first anticipated. Since perception changes depending on time, beholder and culture at that time, it is hard to determine what perceptions are naturally determined. Whether it is musical notes or art, the perception changes. You could argue that the major scale has a positive feel but this has not always been the case since the major scale once was classified as sad and negative; hence, historically determined. One perception that we said can be classified as naturally determined is the fact that we breath. There is no doubt of this fact since we have always performed this subconscious action.

Finally we also discussed whether culture has revolutionary potential and outmost from Benjamin versus Adorno and Horkheimer’s points of view. Benjamin believes culture does have revolutionary potential, an argument he supported with the evolution of photography and how we today use, share and discuss it. It is in that sense obvious that all this change has had an effect on our culture considering how we use photography in our daily lives. Adorno and Horkheimer however, argue that this kind of change, using motion picture and cinemas as an example, are nothing more than entertainment. They are representations of ordinary people and just storytelling of events that have happened to them. Stories that have no impact on the audience's lives nor on the prevailing culture at that time.

Theme 3: Research and theory - Pre-reflections

Computers in Human Behaviour

Impact factor: 2,694

The journal Computer in Human Behaviour is a scholarly journal with the main goal of examining how we humans use computers and how this usage affects our psychology. The articles, along with research, reviews and announcements, that are published concern how using computers affect human development, learning, personality and social interactions. Interactions is also the key focus of the journal as it addresses human interactions with computers and not the actual computers.

Anxiety about internet hacking: Results from a community sample

This article, published in Computers in Human Behaviour during 2015, addresses the how the risk for being hacked can cause anxiety as it threatens our individual online security and integrity. Through an online survey with 304 participants, the authors investigated what the subjects felt regarding the subject.

The findings were concluded that the concern for being exposed for data breach, did affect the subjects levels of anxiety somewhat. Not as much as anticipated but still to some extent. They also found that everyday issues and life hassles affected anxiety levels significantly more. I found it interesting how despite no previous experience of data breach all participant knew what consequences it could lead to, such as depletion in finances and privacy and integrity violation. Nor did their respective background and personalities have any noticeable effect on increased anxiety.

The authors conclude with the suggestion that people should invest in safeguarding themselves online. As of now, most of the subjects were unprotected.

1. Briefly explain to a first year university student what theory is, and what theory is not.

The concept of theory has varied through the ages but the core remains similar. Theory is based upon a reasoning based on facts and empirical studies. Sutton and Staw define theory as: “Theory is the answer to queries of why.” Theory can be determined as the logic explanation of an event or observation and is used to explain why that event occurred.. References from others work, diagrams or data however, can not be classified as theory.

2. Describe the major theory or theories that are used in your selected paper. Which theory type (see Table 2 in Gregor) can the theory or theories be characterized as?

One of the major theory, which is also the most central, is that there is a rising concern and growing recognition that all our electronic and connected devices are at risk of data breach. Simply due to them being connected and often unprotected. This theory is best represented as type IV: Explanation and Prediction (EP) according to Gregor’s categorisation. It describes the current situation of what has happened up until now, how, why and where and also mentions what this insecurity could imply.

3. Which are the benefits and limitations of using the selected theory or theories?

By using these theories, I as a reader, understood from the beginning of the paper what their aim was and how they wanted to achieve it. The theories were clear and relevant in order to answer their question. This makes further research easy to conduct and the authors also give suggestions on how and what can be done in that case. However, the choices of theories and participant location steered the outcome and might have differed of the audience had been wider or broader. 99,3% recided in the US and the rest in Canada, a fact that could have affected the results.

Theme 1: Theory of knowledge and Theory of Science - Post-seminar reflections

After an interesting and intriguing, partially hard to follow, lecture by Johan Eriksson my understanding of mainly Criticism of Pure Reason by Kant became slightly more clear. Whether my interpretations of Theaetetus were in line with what Plato wanted to convey remains unclear. During the lecture I tried to follow Johan’s reasoning as much as possible, listening and trying to grasp the concepts of Kant’s work. Afterwhich and up until the seminar I had shorter discussions about what had been said with a few classmates and prepared for our seminar. For reasons currently unknown we were only 8 participating during our session which gave us all more space to share our thoughts.

We discussed what we did not yet understand and what we believed we understood from the texts and lecture. One part we discussed more thoroughly was regarding Kant’s thoughts of whether we can perceive synthetic objects a priori. The discussion revolved around the fact that all bodies have extensions but also that the bodies exist only if it is actually perceived. The paradox enters, how can an object only exist if it is perceived? Well, if it is not perceived, there is no way of knowing that it actually exists. Say there is a pen, a body with extensions, for example,  lying on a table, we can only say that the pen is there of we perceive it. Otherwise, there is no way we can actually know that a pen lies on a table. In a broader perspective, you can with the same reasoning claim that without people, the world would not exist, since there would not be anyone there to perceive it. On the other hand, we could never know that the world, in this case did not exist because there would be no one there to perceive this. If there were, at least one human, then the world Would obviously exist since that person would perceive the world as it is.

Furthermore, we discussed what would happen if an infant were to be raised in solitude, separated from any kind of upbringing, culture or stimuli. When would the child learn to walk, or Even walk for that matter? If so, would s/he be aware that s/he was walking? That is, would the child learn how to walk, without any previous experience of seeing or being taught about walking or would that skill just never be learnt? If the child learnt how to walk, without any possibility of knowing about walking, that would be synthetic a priori knowledge. Alternatively, one could argue that learning how to walk without the knowledge or experience of walking could also be categorised as a part of our nature. But without ever having tested how the child would actually evolve, we could never know whether learning to walk is part of our nature or upbringing and effects of outer stimuli.  Theoretically, couldn’t the child might as well never learn to walk on two legs? But instead only crawl around or even learn to fly? Similarly between learning to walk or learning to fly, what would trigger the child to learn either of these skills if there were no object of attraction, no outer stimuli? Then the child would have no use for, and hence not develop, either skill.

Theme 2: Critical media studies - Pre-reflections

Dialectic of Enlightenment

1. What is "Enlightenment"?

Enlightenment refers to deeper knowledge. Being enlightened means that the exposed gains understanding and sees the topic clearly without any confusions or misunderstandings.

2. What is "Dialectic"?

Dialectic is the argumentation striving toward a conclusion of absolute truth. To accomplish this truth, the topic of discussion is viewed from different perspectives and through the opposites reaches common ground. Dialectic is also referred to as the main logic of enlightenment used to ensure truth before decision.

3. What is "Nominalism" and why is it an important concept in the text?

The area of nominalism regards the questions whether objects hold truth. And the only objects that hold truth are those that are observable by humans. This means that abstract objects do not actually exist since they are not possible to observe.

Its importance lies in the connection to enlightenment which circles whether object exist or not. Religion, or rather God, is one example that is questioned whether or not it exist since it is not actually possible to observe (disregarding those who claim to have experience an epiphany).

4. What is the meaning and function of "myth" in Adorno and Horkheimer's argument?

A Myth is a story constructed by abstractions. Events and characters, often supernatural, that are unable to be proven to exist. Which then obviously questions its existence.

"The Work of Art in the Age of Technical Reproductivity"

1. In the beginning of the essay, Benjamin talks about the relation between "superstructure" and "substructure" in the capitalist order of production. What do the concepts "superstructure" and "substructure" mean in this context and what is the point of analyzing cultural production from a Marxist perspective?

Benjamin describes substructure as a basis superstructure in every society. The substructure is defined by economic activity, which is either a promotion of capitalism or socialism. The Marxist perspective indicates that is the ordinary citizens of the society, the substructures, whom define culture and politics, superstructures. Consequently, substructure determines superstructure.

2. Does culture have revolutionary potentials (according to Benjamin)? If so, describe these potentials. Does Benjamin's perspective differ from the perspective of Adorno & Horkheimer in this regard?

Benjamin believes that culture has revolutionary potential. The main example he supports this with is the evolution of photography. From sketches and lithography to motion picture and now even instant image sharing highly integrated in our daily lives. It is clear that this evolution has had a revolution and is now a central part of our existence. Adorno and Horkheimer however, view this evolution as nothing but a tool for entertainment and therefore means no actual intellectual substance. Rather the opposite, it keeps us from intellectual evolution and thereby from knowledge.

3. Benjamin discusses how people perceive the world through the senses and argues that this perception can be both naturally and historically determined. What does this mean? Give some examples of historically determined perception (from Benjamin's essay and/or other contexts).

Naturally determined is described by Benjamin as objects that are of permanent nature, for example how every human perceives the world through our senses. Historically determined is rather things that are available for perception. Objects that can change as time passes and as observers too evolve into more new kinds of thinkers. History will affect how objects of all kind will vary in meaning and therefore they can be seen as historically determined.

4. What does Benjamin mean by the term "aura"? Are there different kinds of aura in natural objects compared to art objects?

Generally, aura means unique. The characteristics that any objects has that makes it unique. An object's aura is different depending on observer but at the same time, each object has a unique aura meaning that reproductions and replicas will not inherit the originals aura. Benjamin furthermore claims there to be a difference between natural objects and art as an example. Natural objects are of permanence and uniqueness and can thereby in a sense be “seen by the unarmed eye” as Benjamin describes it.  

Theme 1: Theory of knowledge and Theory of Science - Pre-reflections

Pre-reflections: Theme 1

1.

That all our cognition must conform to objects implies that what we experience must relate to a corresponding object. When trying to expand our cognitions into grasping knowledge that does not require any experience to understand, logical knowledge, a priori, such as we need to breath air to survive or that all of us attending this class are human beings, we have according to Kant, failed. But he then proposes that if we experiment and assume that objects must conform to our cognition, that is the other way around, we might make progress in metaphysical problems.

What this would indulge is that our cognitions limit would broaden and thereby increasing the reach of our experiences. In other words, we would be able to experience events that as of today are not possible. Events, a priori, that we comprehend as certainties without actually having experienced them. Things we know without having had the experience. But how would this function? How would objects conform our cognition? Would we not need to evolve our cognition, our experience abilities, to becoming more complex and skilled at gathering experiences? We must try and observe an object from the object's perspective as well as from your own.

2.

The initial thought that comes to mind it that our eyes and ears are merely tools which we use to absorb surrounding events. It is not until the light and sound waves reach the interior that we are able to comprehend and understand what has just happend before us. Hence; through the eyes and ears. Empiricism, as we are familiar with, has its basis that all knowledge from the outer world is perceived through impressions and sensory perceptions. With this one could argue that not before any happening is perceived that it becomes knowledge. The information must pass through our sensory organs and then be processed and interpreted before it can be defined as knowledge. During the event when our eyes and ears are receiving new information, we are not yet able to call this information knowledge since our minds has not yet process it. This is how I understand Socrates argument to relate to empiricism.

However, this contradicts Socrates and Theaetetus conclusion that knowledge and perception can never be the same thing which they seem rather convinced about. It might be due to me having difficulties following their argument leading up to the conclusion but I do not agree that perception can never be the same thing as knowledge. At least I believe that perception is a requirement for knowledge but can not be the sole cornerstone. Something else is needed to. My thoughts circulate around how not all knowledge is gained from outer events. For example, the opinions and arguments laid forth during Socrates and Theaetetus dialogue, had they been previously perceived or simply constructed in their minds. If so, can these arguments and opinions too be considered as knowledge?

//G

First post!

y0!