1991
DOI: 10.1177/092137409100400306
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Role of Action in Evolution: Evolution By Process and the Ecological Approach To Perception

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

1993
1993
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
4
1

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 9 publications
(4 reference statements)
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…It is precisely this difference in orientation to the environment that most fundamentally distinguishes the mariners from those who do not dwell in the watery regions. To borrow Ho's (1991) analogy of the ecological approach to perception, the waters of Southeast Asia is transparent and possesses depth. This is because the more one looks, the more one can see into it.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It is precisely this difference in orientation to the environment that most fundamentally distinguishes the mariners from those who do not dwell in the watery regions. To borrow Ho's (1991) analogy of the ecological approach to perception, the waters of Southeast Asia is transparent and possesses depth. This is because the more one looks, the more one can see into it.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Whereas neo-Darwinists have traditionally regarded the natural or biological being as given (predominantly by its genetic make-up), and hence separate from the social entity, which is only a gloss on the biological, the new evolutionary theory recognizes and insists upon the continuity and inseparability between the two (see Ho and Saunders, 1982;Ho, 1988bHo, , 1992d. This same theme is now taken up by anthropologist Tim Ingold (1992), who argues that 'personhood' arises epigenetically as much as the organism.…”
Section: Integrating Nature and Culturementioning
confidence: 98%
“…So there is, I contend, a real parallel in the modern constitution between the book of nature and the nature of the book, each understood as a completed work whose contents can be deciphered by those with the keys to do so. The parallel lies in the idea that both are to be read in silence: not in the course of an ongoing conversation whose manifold participants open up to one another and whose stories intertwine, but as a record of results that – rendered inert and impassive, in objective and objectified forms – have turned their back on us, presenting to our inspection only what Mae‐Wan Ho has called an ‘opaque, flat, frozen surface of literalness’ (: 348). To science, the facts are given; they comprise the ‘data’.…”
Section: Science and Silencementioning
confidence: 99%