Reflection of Theme3

Unfortunately, I would say I get even more confuse after attending the Seminar. The lecture is clear, the explanation, the presentation, and even the small group talk have same aim, which is to understand what is theory, how can we make our perception more reasonable, it is theory, as my understand.

It’s nice we have a group talk about “What is man(human beings)?”, and everybody has different answer, we all think from different directions, just to give a reasonable explanation which can support our perception, it may be a theory. We need to use fact, experience, what we see, and everything we can use to explain it, it is not enough to just raise a name of perception, since people think from different directions.

From the lecture, I learnt that theory is not about doing something, practice is. Some articles write about practice analysis that is not a theory based article. Even they have digram, chart, data and hypotheses, those are not theory. And I also learnt there are different types of research, scientific research is gathering data, data doesn't be produced by nature. Applied research is use theories, not produce theories. Artistic research is design, as practice-based research.

And in the lecture, I noticed that theory doesn’t mean it is truth, the truth is related to knowledge we understand nowadays. As the example in the Seminar, if we say “there is god in the world”, it may not be truth, because we all don’t know, but it can be theory, if we have good expiation, that support this perception. 

After the seminar group discussion, I’m getting more understand the categories of theory that the article gives, I still believe my chosen paper is using Manipulation or teleological causal analysis, which is in the category called “Explanation and Prediction”, even though I thought the limitation of this type is lack of evidence, prediction is too abstract. After discussion, I think theory can perfectly clear this lack, just use good explanation. This become a theory explanation leads to a result, not just simply assume what will be.

This reflection is based on my understanding of theory, maybe it’s not so. I said I’m getting more confuse, since both lecture and seminar, even the article, are keeping establishing and breaking my understand of theory, until now, I don’t know if I am walking in the right way.

Theme 4: Quantitative research

At the beginning, it’s hard for me to know what kind of research is quantitative research, after searching on the internet, I know quantitative research is the systematic empirical investigation of observable phenomena via statistical, mathematical or computational techniques. And I know questionnaire, and experimental test, statistic, analysis and conclude are used in a quantitative research.

My chosen paper is "Activity Recognition using Cell Phone Accelerometers"

Authors: Jennifer R. Kwapisz Fordham University, Bronx, NY

Gary M. Weiss Fordham University, Bronx, NY

Samuel A. Moore Fordham University, Bronx, NY

Published Newsletter: ACM SIGKDD Explorations Newsletter archive

Volume 12 Issue 2, December 2010

This paper talked about to describe and evaluate a system that uses phone-based accelerometers to perform activity recognition, a task which involves identifying the physical activity a user is performing.

Which quantitative method or methods are used in the paper? Which are the benefits and limitations of using these methods?

The method is collection of empirical data, the benefits are understood and respond more appropriately to dynamics of situations, provide respect to contextual differences, help to build upon what is already known, provide opportunity to meet standards of professional research.

What did you learn about quantitative methods from reading the paper?

Quantitative research includes, hypotheses, predictions, observation, experiment, test of predictions, conclude etc. The experiment is an important part in quantitative research.

Which are the main methodological problems of the study? How could the use of the quantitative method or methods have been improved?

They hypotheses, and use quantitative methods to verify which of such hypotheses are true. They collected labeled accelerometer data from twenty-nine users as they performed daily activities such as walking, jogging, climbing stairs, sitting, and standing, and then aggregated this time series data into examples that summarise the user activity over 10 second intervals. And they plot the figures and analysis the data collected. Finally, they conclude the result.

IEEE VR 2012 - Drumming in Immersive Virtual Reality

Which are the benefits and limitations of using quantitative methods?

Benefits

- Testing and validating already constructed theories about how and why phenomena occur

- Testing hypotheses that are constructed before the data are collected

- Can generalize research findings when the data are based on random samples of sufficient size

- Can generalize a research finding when it has been replicated on many different populations and subpopulations

- Useful for obtaining data that allow quantitative predictions to be made

- The researcher may construct a situation that eliminates the confounding influence of many variables, allowing one to more credibly establish cause-and-effect relationships

- Data collection using some quantitative methods is relatively quick (e.g., telephone interviews)

- Provides precise, quantitative, numerical data

- Data analysis is relatively less time consuming (using statistical software)

The research results are relatively independent of the researcher (e.g., statistical significance)

It may have higher credibility with many people in power (e.g., administrators, politicians, people who fund programs)

It is useful for studying large numbers of people

Limitations

- The researcher’s categories that are used might not reflect local constituencies’ understandings

- The researcher’s theories that are used might not reflect local constituencies’ understandings

- The researcher might miss out on phenomena occurring because of the focus on theory or hypothesis testing rather than on theory or hypothesis generation (called the confirmation bias)

Knowledge produced might be too abstract and general for direct application to specific local situations, contexts, and individuals.

Which are the benefits and limitations of using qualitative methods?

Benefits

- provide you with details about the human behaviour, emotion, and personality characteristics that quantitative studies cannot match.

- Qualitative data includes information about user behaviours, needs, desires, routines, use cases, and a variety of other information that is essential in designing a product that will actually fit into a user’s life.

Limitation

- qualitative research requires the flexibility of data collection, allowing you to respond to user data as it emerges during a session.

Reflection of Theme2

After the seminar of this theme2, I think I extend my view, at beginning, I think I even understand the question in a very narrow way, so most of my answer is not very same as others, but after the seminar, everything become clear.

From the seminar I know the difference between Nominalism and Realism, concept are real is realism, concept is not real which is just name is Nominalism. And the example is for the Nominalism, A chair is just chair, it’s only that chair, nothing else, it can not change. For realism, a chair is something can be square or round or any shape. Nominalism is more specific, realism is more general. 

And I also learned Nominalism is negative, it means things can not be changed, Chair is Chair, poor people are poor, rich people are rich, it's actual will change in the future, then it doesn't match Nominalism. 

Also, for the substructure and superstructure change which is culture and art in Benjamin’s concept, substructure will influence people’s life every day, but superstructure things which are spirit food may not influence so obviously. But it still have a strong impact to people’s thinking way, it might change the perception of future for people.

"Auro" which is a kernel view in Benjamin’s article, through the seminar I got more deep understand of this "Auro" word. Benjamin thinks aura only refer to few people who can have this object. Print the "Auro" art will destroy the "Auro" of the original work of art. But via the media way, for example, we can print it, then everybody can have their own "Auro" work of art, we can spread the work of art. In this way, Media maybe the good thing.

Theme 3: Research and theory

Title: 3-D cinema: immersive media technology

Author: Jackman, Anna Hamilton

Journal: GeoJournal

ISSN: 0343-2521

Date: 06/06/2015

DOI: 10.1007/s10708-015-9651-5

This paper has aimed to provide a sustained consideration of the previously under-examined, yet commercially and popularly notable, media format of 3-D cinema. It talked about people emotion, “heightened sensory experience”, and “immersive”. It talked about technological shift towards the increasingly pervasive and sophisticated engagement of the wider multi-sensory palette is explored. And it uses a lot of references.

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

ASQ thinks reference is not theory, none of reference, data, variable, diagram and hypotheses are theory, even they are often used in articles. Theory is answer “WHY”, it’s relationship between different phenomena, it’s a story about why acts, events, structures and thoughts occur. Theory will dig into the process to understand why this phenomena occur or not occur. It will investigate the micro process, some other concept or other direction, and expand it to social phenomena. It will contain some meaning which may even conflict with our common knowledge.

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?

I think the paper I select is using the Manipulation or teleological causal analysis. Since they relies on an everyday understanding of a cause as an act by an intentional agent. It talked about how important the ‘’immersive’’ in the 3-D cinema, which is considered about people’s emotion. And the aims is actually tried to ‘‘heightened sensory experience’’.

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

The benefit is make the concept of research more reasonable, The limitation is lack of evidence, no soundness argument.

Theme 2: Critical media studies

Dialectic of Enlightenment:

What is “Enlightenment"?

“Enlightenment, understood in the widest sense as the advance of thought, has always aimed at liberating human beings from fear and installing them as masters.” the aims of enlightenment is to make people not be afraid of doubt, everybody should dispel myths, and overthrow fantasy with knowledge. And the myths which fell victim to the Enlightenment were themselves its products. “it amputates the incommensurable. Not merely are qualities dissolved in thought, but human beings are forced into real conformity.”

What is “Dialectic"?

“a product of dialectical thinking, in which each thing is what it is only by becoming what it is not.”

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

“Within the sphere of ideas in which mythical figures executed the unalterable edicts of fate, the distinction between word and object was unknown. The word was thought to have direct power over the thing, expression merged with intention.” They named things to present the power of things, and the hero can break the unchangeable name. This concept Interdependent and interrelated, mutual development and mutual unity are manifestations of the social reality of the relationship.

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

The myth is enlightenment, myth is people in that century use Abstract name to represent the origin of things, It is the predecessor of the Enlightenment.

The Work of Art in the Age of Technical Reproductivity:

At 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?

At Marxist perspective, at that time the capitalist order of production was in primary stage, and he tried to make his research has predicted value, which makes people realise capitalism increasingly enhanced exploitation of the proletariat, because the superstructure of change is much slower than the base architecture change.

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?

Yes, Benjamin thinks culture has revolutionary potential. At that time, the propaganda of the Nazi regime uses work of art as a propaganda tool, some of the artists work for them. He thinks  if we do not use them sparingly, it will lead to processing in accordance with the wishes of the fascist Facts. His concept is different from the perspective of Adorno& Horkheimer, their concept is mass culture regard as a controlling tool for the mass.

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).

This concept emphasises perception and perceived interaction between the two object, even one of the object is a tree or picture, there still could inspire a feeling like emotion exchange. This two object should be absence, face to face. For example, when you watch a painting, you can feel the thinking of the artist from it, even though this painting is from several centuries ago. This is emotion interaction.

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

He means  the work of art is unique, and should not be copied, the term “aura” is in the original version. The original has its “Echtheit” at that time and place. Natural objects have their different aura since it can not be copied.

Reflection of Theme1

First of all, I would say it's really nice to have this course, even though at beginning, I really dislike it, since I never learnt about Philosophy and never carefully read any book or article written by philosopher, I thought this task for me is mission impossible. However, finally I did finish read the articles, and learned a lot from them. Before the Seminar I was confused by the relationship between apriori knowledge and aposteriori knowledge, how can they defined as apriori knowledge or aposteriori? And I think I getting understand during the seminar.

From this Theme 1 I realize our knowledge is not something just from our experience, we should not firmly say we get know something as a knowledge, since as the professor said "all bodies has extension". And our knowledge that been proved can be our apriori knowledge, then we create aposteriori knowledge, after we prove this aposterior knowledge is true by basing our apriori knowledge,  it is can be the apriori knowledge refers to another aposterior knowledge. And I know, "Transcendental condition of knowledge is Forms of intuition: Space and Time", Kant give the catogory which is his Apriori knowledge, and by this catogory and forms of intuition which is space and time, we can generate aposteriori knowledge by check if it has these faculties. It is important I know "perception without conception is blind, conception without perception is empty". It's hard to generate a world is a world, but we can generate it by refering our apriori knowledge to prove the aposteriori knowledge to our experience.

Theme 1: Theory of knowledge and theory of science

It's the first time for me to seriously read a Philosophy Article, Although it is hard to understand at beginning, after several times read, understand and discuss, it become more understandable. And I feel it's really good to read such an article for engineers. It provides some energy and make me relax. Except struggle to alive in the world, People need to think sometime during the life, it's spirit energy. It extend our thinking, avoid us been locked in fixed mindset.
From Plato's Theaetetus:

Actually it's an article that record of Socrates and Theaetetus's dialogue. Theduros introduce Teaetetus as a very remarkable Athenian youth to Socrates, and Socrates want to examine if Theaetetus worthy his praise by asking question if "wisdom and knowledge are the same" and "what is knowledge".

During the Dialogue, Socrates play the role as a soul midwife, who wants to help Theaetetus define and understand "knowledge" he said:"I watch over the labor of their souls, not of their bodies. And the most important thing about my art is the ability to apply all possible tests to the offspring, to determine whether the young mind is being delivered of a phantom, that is, an error, or a fertile truth". Theaetetus thought "knowledge is simply perception" at beginning, Socrates raise two problems about this opinion, "false perception" and "dreaming and waking phenomena". And From this part, I realize nobody and nothing are judges, everything may change, we often use our experience and feeling to judge a matter, but it may not be the truth. Sense is not knowledge. After that, Theaetetus gives another opinion "true judgment may well be knowledge". Socrates talked about "misapplication" by holding the wax example. And I realize I am still in the level of "Knowing" which is the having of knowledge which is not the possession of knowledge. After redefine, Theaetetus thought "it is true judgment with an account that is knowledge; true judgment without an account falls outside of knowledge", and Socrates use the example of "Letters and syllables" to refute this again. Theaetetus didn't get an exact answer, and from now I think Philosophy do not have an exact answer, it's not like a coding, we only think in a straight way, even with different methods, the final purpose is to get the same result. In philosophy, with different ways in different condition, the answers are always different. Sophistry is a charm point in philosophy. And for the question, I think the modern terms "empiricism" refers to those people who define a matter by their "knowing" through their eyes and ears. In Socrates opinion, we know something through our eyes and ears, but it may not be truth, eyes and ears is a tool, it's not measurement, even we know we can not just define it as "knowledge", everything may change, they may have some unknown sections which probably can totally redefine the matter.

From Kant's Critique of Pure Reason:

This is much harder to read than Plato's Teaetetus, there are too much professional English word in the article, I have to check dictionary all the time since my mother language is not English, it's a big challenge for me. But I think as an engineer, I should like Kant more, it's more logical.

Kant was living in a century where full of Synthetic prior judgments, and he was confused by Hume's empiricism, and he reject Hume's empiricism. Kant tells an example of synthetic judgments "7+5=12", and thinks mathematics is synthetic judgment a prior. Then Kant proposes a new basis for a science of metaphysics, posing the question: "how is a science of metaphysics possible, if at all?", and he uses experiments to prove "the abandonment of the quest to try to know the world as it is ‘in itself' independent of sense experience." From this I know sense or pure reason can not independently support a view, they have to do a combination. Neither sense nor pure reason can alive without experience. I feel Kant is really good at collation. There is four principle to understand the "pure": Axioms of Intuition, Anticipations of Perception, Analogies of Experience, Postulates of Empirical Thought in General. For the question, I think he means, the sense which is ability that we get an appearance of an object, by having been stimulated by this object, and through this we get an intuition of object, furthermore this intuition will be thinking by knowledge, and finally it become a concept. As he said from the beginning we have to assume the object conform to our cognition.

Conclusion:

Until now, I find both Plato's Theaetetus and Kant's Critique of Pure Reason were talking about "Know". I think if I know the background and history about them, I will get a new understand of these two articles.