„mit und in seiner Umwelt geboren“

Gruevska, Julia

doi:10.1007/s00048-019-00220-z

Cited by 4 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A particular influence in Pawley's reasoning is that of animal psychologist and physiologist Frederik J.J. Buytendijk, who investigated the thesis of an 'animal-environment unit' and claimed that the animal was 'born with and in its environment'. 11 Another key reference is Robert Ardrey's The Territorial Imperative (1966), a successful work of popular science which claims that acquiring and defending territory is an inherited instinct that still defines human behaviour in modern societies. Drawing on these sources, Pawley writes, 'behavior can only be understood in the context of the environment in which it takes place.…”

Section: Territorymentioning

confidence: 99%

The Time House: between cybernetics and phenomenology

Ioannidou

2024

Architecture_MPS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Martin Pawley’s ‘The Time House’ (1968) is a study on how to use multimedia technologies to provide a continuous record of individual experience within the domestic interior. The project’s underlying argument is that there is no authentic experience to be had in the public realm. As an antidote, Pawley proposes a retreat into a private world, where individuals, with the use of technology, can retain a continuous and repayable record of time. Thus, The Time House would enable its inhabitants to relive – phenomenologically, with all the senses – past experiences. Pawley believed that this repeated, unembellished re-creation of the past would reveal to its inhabitants a truer version of both the past and themselves, thus offering opportunities for introspection and self-knowledge. The Time House tries to bring together all the key concerns of architecture in the late 1960s: cybernetics, phenomenology, environmental behaviour studies, the use of cutting-edge technology, Cold War politics and fears, and the countercultural aim to expand human consciousness. Yet, Pawley’s proposition to use technology to simulate lived experiences with the aim of altering human behaviour still stimulates heated arguments today. These arguments stem from current fears about the effects of digital technologies on individuals and society: the disconnection with the here-and-now, the prioritisation of the individual over the collective, the disintegration of reality and the neglect of social public space. The Time House, which could be dismissed as a project of its time and place, is embedded in a web of ideas still resonant in our present.

show abstract

Section: Territorymentioning

confidence: 99%

The Time House: between cybernetics and phenomenology

Ioannidou

2024

Architecture_MPS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Analysis and/or Interpretation in Neurophysiology? A Transatlantic Discussion Between F. J. J. Buytendijk and K. S. Lashley, 1929–1932

Gruevska

2022

J Hist Biol

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the interwar period, biologists employed a diverse set of holistic approaches that were connected to different research methodologies. Against this background, this article explores attempts in the 1920s and 1930s to negotiate quantitative and qualitative methods in the field of neurophysiology. It focuses on the work of two scientists on different sides of the Atlantic: the Dutch animal psychologist and physiologist Frederik J.J. Buytendijk and the American neuropsychologist Karl S. Lashley, specifically analyzing their critical correspondence, 1929–1932, on the problems surrounding the term intelligence. It discusses the inexplicable anomalies in neurophysiology as well as the reliability of quantitative and qualitative methods. While in his laboratory work Lashley adhered to a strictly analytic approach, Buytendijk tried to combine quantitative methods with phenomenological and hermeneutical approaches. The starting point of their discussion is Lashley’s monograph on Brain Mechanisms and Intelligence (1929) and the rat experiments discussed therein. Buytendijk questioned the viability of the maze-learning method and the use of statistics to test intelligence in animals; he reproduced Lashley’s experiments and then confronted Lashley with his critical findings. In addition to elucidating this exchange, this paper will, more generally, shed light on the nature of the disagreements and shared assumptions prevalent among interwar neurophysiologists. In turn, it contributes to historiographical debates on localization and functionalism and the discrepancy between analytic (quantitative) and interpretative (qualitative) approaches.

show abstract

Organisms as subjects: Jakob von Uexküll and Adolf Portmann on the autonomy of living beings and anthropological difference

Jaroš

Brentari

2022

HPLS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

„mit und in seiner Umwelt geboren“

Cited by 4 publications

References 19 publications

The Time House: between cybernetics and phenomenology

The Time House: between cybernetics and phenomenology

Analysis and/or Interpretation in Neurophysiology? A Transatlantic Discussion Between F. J. J. Buytendijk and K. S. Lashley, 1929–1932

Organisms as subjects: Jakob von Uexküll and Adolf Portmann on the autonomy of living beings and anthropological difference

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About