Sentences with phrase «in human perception»

For example, Mackinlay illustrated in 1985 that certain types of data visualization techniques are more effective given inherent limitations in human perception and processing.

His work focuses on wild animals and how they exist in human perception.

The exhibition continues Titchner's interest in human perception, language, and states of mind, and examines the symbolism of sexuality and gender, encryption, illusion, and symbology.

She is interested in human perception, the way we look at other people, how we see ourselves, and how we define our identities.

Pareidolia refers to the tendency in human perception to discover meaning in random structures

They only difference is a shift in human perception of what is and is not natural canine behavior and / or aggression and the breed of dog involved.»

«This class of compounds produces profound changes in human perception and consciousness, and essentially it's been taken off the clinical research bench for 40 years — it's almost unthinkable,» he says.

The difference between the telescope and the microscope is not simply the configuration of lenses; it is also in human perception and the anticipation of what is seen.

In human perception, as H. H. Price (1932) has shown, the very idea of a material object is dependent upon an element of anticipation.

Hence there is no reason for us to assume that in human perception the cosmological axiom that «everything is everywhere» is suspended.

As such it is always subject to errors that can be controlled but not governed entirely by practical and / or socially established evaluative or critical methods.18 The indispensable factor of interpretation in the dynamic processes of semiosis even leads to the idea that there is a generic form of imagination in physical becoming, in addition to a primary or radical form in human perception, a consideration that would indeed justify calling creativity the category of the ultimate, just as Whitehead maintains.

It is the «there» and «now» element in human perception.

Berger's answer is that religion has no monopoly on morality, as morality is grounded in human perception rather than norms (i.e., good and bad).

This revelation is natural, in the sense that it is part and parcel of both the creation and human nature, and it is general, inasmuch as it is a functional component in all human perception and cognition.

In her piece, Klein, spends a lot of time focused on the valuable body of social science research I've also explored here showing the normal nature of the wide range in human perceptions of global warming (and other kinds of risks saddled with complexity and uncertainty).

Not exact matches

But if we add enough sensors like Lidar and radar and high - dynamic range cameras, in combination we will be able to surpass human perception.

Even if you have the willpower to ignore the constant tones and alert lights in the background, the sound can still impair your concentration, according to a study published in the Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance.

But her opinion is noteworthy given the perception that robots have become so advanced in recent years that they stand to outperform humans in many tasks and dramatically alter the workforce.

The value of Schilt's work is in its use of the experiences of extraordinary people as a lens to reveal how the value of human capital — an individual's education, experience and abilities — is tied to gender perceptions.

Adding, «[VR] connects humans to other humans in a profound way I've never before seen in any other form of media, and it can change people's perception of each other.»

All the good works done by religious organizations of all kinds (Christian and otherwise) might get a mention in a human interest story sometimes, but decades of this media treatment have skewed public perceptions of what faith is about.

Thereafter it was only a short path to Kant's «critically idealist» abandonment of the world «in itself» and retreat to the world available only to the human apparatus of perception.

«Positive» is just a word in this case, it does not mean «good» or «progressive» or anything we would associate with the word «positive» in human social interactions or human perceptions.

The throw - weight of the Holy See, the papacy, and the Catholic Church in twenty - first - century world affairs reflects the perception that the Church has become the world's preeminent institutional defender of basic human rights — and thus the greatest bulwark, among the great world religions, to the freedom project around the globe.

Yes — and I think there is something in our human nature that is about survival that while a good and necessary thing to have can when mixed with none of us being perfect lead us to perceptions and magical thinking which may or may not be in touch with reality.

in some ways memory is a better key to the nature of experience than perception, not only because, by the time we have used a datum of perception, it will already have been taken over by memory, but for the additional reasons: (a,) in memory there is less mystery concerning what we are trying to know than there is in perception [i.e., «our own past human experiences»]; also (all) the temporal structure of memory is more obvious.

It would be otiose to give examples: a distant thunder is in the past as much as a distant star; but no matter how far in time - space a star or galaxy is, it is always faintly immanent in my Here - Now even when its action is below the threshold of human perception; its action can be made visible by a combination of lenses or a prolonged photographic exposure.

to Jake, in every era or times in the past, humans have different perception of reality, because our knowledge improves or changes toward sophistication, For example during the times of Jesus, there was no science yet as what we have today, since the religion in the past corresponds to their needs, it is true for them in the past, but today we already knew many new ideas and facts, so what is applicable in the past is no longer today, like religion, we have also to change to conform with todays knowledge.The creation or our origin for example is now explained beyond doubt by science as the big bang and evolution is the reason we become humans, is in contrast to creation in the bibles genesis,.

That faith, plus other perceptions about our personal lives and the course of human history, provided a dimension to our stories that I call their setting: the world the story sets in which story's plot can credibly unfold and its character develop.

Later the idea gained ground that we can not «speak of nature apart from human perception in the historical development of knowledge», that all knowledge is «a creative interaction between the known and the knower» and that therefore there is no System of scientific knowledge or of technology which does not have the subjective purposes and faith - presuppositions of humans built into it.

In the development of human thought and perception, the shift from primary orality to vowelised literacy involves the movement from an implicit sense of things in concrete operational thinking to explicit concepts articulated through abstract thinkinIn the development of human thought and perception, the shift from primary orality to vowelised literacy involves the movement from an implicit sense of things in concrete operational thinking to explicit concepts articulated through abstract thinkinin concrete operational thinking to explicit concepts articulated through abstract thinking.

your understanding of the change process is very simplistic, because your mind is not open, you specifically believe already in the traditional doctrines, Dogmas as shown in thousands of years of history evolves, and the need for input variables, meaning the diversity of religious belief is necessay because nature through his will is requiring this to happen, we are being educated by God in the events of history.In the past when there was no humans yet Gods will is directly manifisted in nature, with our coming and education through history, we gradually takes the responsibilty of implementing the will.Your complaint on your perception of abuse is just part of the complex process of educating us through experience.

Human feelings, sensory perceptions, thinking process, etc. are all highly limited in range and flawed within its range.

Teilhard's importance, Berry believes, lies in his comprehensive vision of the universe as a psychic - spiritual as well as a physical - material process, his perception of the human as the consciousness of the universe, and his shifting of the focus of Western religious concern from redemption to creation.

Consciousness can not be a quality of an abstract deductive structure, yet Whitehead speaks of consciousness; hence White - head must be affirming consciousness of human perception in the passage in question — so the inference goes.

«RESOLVED, That we affirm God's good design that gender identity should be determined by biological sex and not by one's self - perception — a perception which is often influenced by fallen human nature in ways contrary to God's design (Eph.

There is an intellectual seductiveness to the idea of one blazing sun of truth, seen imperfectly from different viewing points in human history, with the perception becoming ever more ample as the different views are correlated and added up.

As is well known, there are many significant points of divergence between the two philosophers, but we shall keep to our topic of human experience as manifested in its basic mode, primitive perception.

Whitehead's use of assumptions dating back to Descartes and Locke in his account of perception leaves him vulnerable to the criticisms introduced by the revolution in philosophic method taking place at the time he was writing his major works, one in which the analysis of the functioning of language was replacing psychological introspection as the principal method for understanding human thought.

However, since all empirical generalizations are in principle falsifiable, we can not here assert that such an alleged «need,» or indeed any psychological perception, is common to all human beings.

For in the reality constructed by human imagination, the reality of a thousand national identities, foundational myths, bogus perceptions of «our» innocence and «their» wickedness, who could ever be a judge whose impartiality would be recognized and whose arbitration would be accepted?

As Walter Lippmann said in his groundbreaking book Public Opinion, humans act in the real world on the basis of the perceptions created increasingly for us by the media's pseudo-environment.

In a stroke, then, Russell is able to dispense with Meinong's ontological conundrum and the ontological argument, while providing as adequate an account as anyone has ever been able to offer of how normal human perception and sense data relate to the «objects» of physics.

He was not, for example, particularly hospitable to the American realists» attempts to reconceive the very notion of experience upon which empiricism should be founded, preferring instead to join Moore and others in England in a virtually uncritical acceptance of the older «commonsense» notion of experience as human (and usually visual) perception derived from their seventeenth - century cultural predecessors Locke and Hume.2

Furthermore, human sense perception is only to be understood as a condition of the possibility of intellectual cognition, posited by spirit in contradistinction to itself but for itself, and consequently once again affirms the kinship of spirit and matter.

Basic to this discovery is the recognition that human experience is not exhausted by the external sense perceptions of which science and history are in their different forms the critical analysis.

about our powerlessness to penetrate in this sense beyond the primitive vision shared by the earliest human minds; that is to say, the impossibility of our advancing a step towards the direct or indirect perception of all that is hidden behind the veil of tangible experience!

Furthermore, according to Hartshorne, the relationships involved in human knowledge by means of perception are analogous to those obtaining in cases of volition.

He states that a man may have immediate awarenesses of two kinds: intuitive awareness of his own thoughts and feelings and sympathetic awareness of certain changes in parts of his body.21 The second type of direct human awareness involves the principle that the objects immediately known in sensation or perception are always objects inside the body and never objects outside the body.

What I want to suggest is that we have to see the work of God in Christ as that which secures against the ever - present menace of their dissolution, our frail, but genuine, human perceptions and affirmations (in action) of the morally excellent.