IngoldThe argument put forth is similar to Serres via Deligny and the Arachnean as outlined in my 702 Essay.
‘Seen from within’, wrote Hägerstrand, ‘one could think of the tips of trajectories as sometimes being pushed forward by forces behind and sometimes having eyes looking around and arms reaching out, at every moment asking “what shall I do next”?’
Over fifty years ago, the pioneer of psychological anthropology, A. Irving Hallowell, argued that ‘any inner-outer dichotomy, with the human skin as boundary, is psychologically irrelevant’ (1955: 88), a view echoed by the anthropologist Gregory Bateson in a lecture delivered in 1970, in which he declared that ‘the mental world – the mind – the world of information processing – is not limited by the skin
’ (Bateson 1973: 429). Much more recently, philosopher Andy Clark has made the same point. The mind,
Clark tells us, is a ‘leaky organ’ that will not be confined within the skull but mingles with the body and the world in the conduct of its operations (Clark 1997: 53).
Gross
Hornecker problematizes the concepts of tight coupling and immediacy.
Vallgårda and Redstom take this approach of looking at computational artefacts as designed, physical objects. One such artefact, Chronos Chromos Concrete, combines computational elements with concrete to allow it to dynamically change its appearance
(2007) Computational composites. In:
Proceedings of CHI’97, New York, ACM pp 513–522
‘‘Expressed more precisely, a computational com-posite can exist in a number of
states(e.g. colors,shapes, or positions). Whenever a set of conditions is met, atransition
towards a new state is begun. The conditions and their fulfillment are
controlled or computed..”
I feel the conclusion here is that how media and data interact and are treated yields style ???