Daniel's E-learning and Digital Cultures Blog » consciousness http://edc11.education.ed.ac.uk/danielg part of the MSc in E-learning at the University of Edinburgh Sun, 11 Dec 2011 16:22:31 +0000 en hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.1 Summary: Week 10 http://edc11.education.ed.ac.uk/danielg/2011/11/25/summary-week-10/ http://edc11.education.ed.ac.uk/danielg/2011/11/25/summary-week-10/#comments Fri, 25 Nov 2011 21:54:43 +0000 Daniel Griffin http://edc11.education.ed.ac.uk/danielg/?p=7914 A quick review of my lifestream will show that this has been somewhat of a disjointed week, due mostly to my inability to settle on a topic for the Posthuman Pedagogy assignment.  I began the week confident in my decision that I wanted to focus on the idea of distributed consciousness (lifestream: 22:11.2011 #1, #2, #3 and #4) which first arose in the previous week.  However as I dug deeper into this concept, it became clear to me that it would be difficult to single out a concrete learning task, given the fact that we could argue humans have always had a distributed consciousness, i.e. our tools shape our thought process and we have always been posthuman (lifestream: 19.11.2011 #1). I also spent a little time thinking about brain augmentation (lifestream: 21.11.2011 #6) and artificial minds (lifestream: 21.11.2011 #5), before finally settling on the idea of Augmented Reality (AR) as a perfect example (lifestream: 24.11.2011 #5, #6 and #7).  AR has really come of age and it’s interesting to see how many popular applications are emerging (lifestream: 25.11.2011 #1).  I’ve discovered two other great finds during the week; thanks firstly to a reminder from Jeremy (since I must have failed to follow up on reference to his work in earlier prescribed readings), of Steve Fuller.  It’s proven difficult to find much of Fuller’s writing, but I have found some fascinating videos (lifestream: 25.11.11 #2), which have echoed deeply with my own thoughts .  And secondly, the mind blowing and borderline psychedelic writing and artwork of Robert Pepperell which has influenced my thoughts on personalised realities in my Posthuman Pedagogy post.

]]>
http://edc11.education.ed.ac.uk/danielg/2011/11/25/summary-week-10/feed/ 0
Posthuman Pedagogy http://edc11.education.ed.ac.uk/danielg/2011/11/24/augmented-reality/ http://edc11.education.ed.ac.uk/danielg/2011/11/24/augmented-reality/#comments Thu, 24 Nov 2011 22:52:22 +0000 Daniel Griffin http://edc11.education.ed.ac.uk/danielg/?p=7724 Augmented Reality Learning Environments – A posthuman pedagogy

Although philosophical idealists will argue that there is no such thing as a common reality, in everyday practice we have chosen to believe in one. Through our senses and communications, we live in a shared reality that we refer to as the real world, but by degrees, this shared reality is being extended, enhanced and personalised through the use of tools that allow for a richer interpretation of what is considered to be “real”.  Such tools exist in many forms, from cognitive frameworks right through to actual physical devices that extend the senses and create “new forms of human presence, half-real, half-virtual” (Ascott, 2003, quoted in Bayne, 2010).  Perhaps the most conspicuous of these is the growing use of augmented reality as an layer of information on top of the physical world.  “Augmented reality (AR) refers to the addition of a computer-assisted contextual layer of information over the real world, creating a reality that is enhanced or augmented”, (Horizon Report, 2011).  When one first uses augmented reality to view the world, the experience is uncanny in the extreme.  The physical world is suddenly extended to include a rich layer of multimedia that the viewer can interact with to better understand their environment.  High end augmented reality systems can be very complex and may include many subsystems, such as head mounted displays, data gloves or global positioning systems; but for the average consumer (and therefore the average student), something as simple as a smart phone application can achieve a similar result.  An excellent example of such an app is Streetmusuem:Londinium.

 

Streetmuseum-Londinium

 

Streetmusuem:Londinium is an iPhone app, developed in collaboration between the Museum of London and the History Channel, which recreates portions of London city as it might have appeared during the Ancient Roman era.  Layers of video and text, maps and 3D models of ancient architecture can be viewed on top of the real world.  As the user moves about their environment the scene changes in real-time.  These layers of reality combine within the consciousness mind of the learner. “From two, one—something different, new, and tasty”, (Carpenter, 2009).

“One of the most promising aspects of augmented reality is that it can be used for visual and highly interactive forms of learning, allowing the overlay of data onto the real world as easily as it simulates dynamic processes”, (Horizon Report, 2011).  When a person interacts with these layers of media, they are essentially engaging in a constructivist and exploratory learning session within a new reality.  Because such media layers are fluid and may change based on user input, this new reality is individual and uniquely distinctive both for each learner and for each learning session.  When we connect augmented reality systems with other networks, the potential of new layers of reality grows exponentially, as does our capacity to create new realities for ourselves, or to share them with others.  One might argue that when we augment our reality, we simultaneously augment our own consciousness, and when we share our reality, we likewise  share our conscious state with others. “Just as the brain needs the body to create conscious activity, so the body needs the environment to create conscious activity”, (Pepperell, 2010).

 

Conclusion

The interface to an augmented reality system is a tool that allows the user to modify their own reality, extending it in directions never before imagined.  Graphical user interfaces allow us to visualise complex data sets but when those data sets correspond directory to our immediate physical environment, we suddenly gain the ability to understand that environment and our place within in it, in profound new ways.  Through the use of symbolic languages and well designed semiotic icons, we allow humanity to communicate without regional linguistic variation, achieving precision of expression and clarity in the transfer of meaning that is simply impossible in the “natural” world.

 

Augmented Reality Examples

MovableScreen at Allard Pierson Museum in Amsterdam

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0UODkvUTnAU

Streetmusuem:Londinium.

http://edition.cnn.com/2011/TECH/innovation/07/29/roman.london.app/index.html

35 Awesome Augmented Reality Examples

http://www.bannerblog.com.au/news/2009/06/35_awesome_augmented_reality_examples.php

 

References

Bayne, S. (2010).  Academetron, automaton, phantom: uncanny digital pedagogies.

Carpenter, R (2009). Boundary Negotiations: Electronic Environments as Interface.

Pepperell, R. (2009). ‘Art and the fractured unity of consciousness’ in New Realities: Being Syncretic Consciousness Reframed.

The Horizon Report, 2011.  Two to Three Years: Augmented Reality

 

 

]]>
http://edc11.education.ed.ac.uk/danielg/2011/11/24/augmented-reality/feed/ 9
Summary: Week 8 http://edc11.education.ed.ac.uk/danielg/2011/11/13/summary-week-8/ http://edc11.education.ed.ac.uk/danielg/2011/11/13/summary-week-8/#comments Sun, 13 Nov 2011 15:26:48 +0000 Daniel Griffin http://edc11.education.ed.ac.uk/danielg/?p=6136 I began week  eight by asking the question, are we already posthuman (lifestream: 07.11.2011, #1)?  In many ways, we depend on tools like a mobile phone as a type of cognitive prosthesis, an extra layer of memory which grants us an increased ability or processing power than our (basic?) organic minds could otherwise achieve.  I revisited Andy Clark and David Chambers fascinating paper The Extended Mind (lifestream: 08.11.2011 #7) in which they argue that external content could be viewed as a modifier to consciousness.  The speed of retrieval for such information is usually offered as a counter argument to the point, however, one could certainly make the claim that if our consciousness is constructed and based on available stimuli, then the tools, connections and web services which we rely on to aid decision making are in fact part of a single suite – we already have a distributed consciousness.  Indeed social constructionists would argue that much of our awareness of reality is defined by our interactions with others; thus making all cognition distributed to some degree.  If this is true, then although digital tools are a new chapter in the story of human development, they continue the same theme and merely allow the same processes to take place at a more efficient and optimized pace.  The caviat here of course is the danger of disconnection from these tools when we have come to rely on them.  If we are unable to act independly, relying too much on external data streams for decision making, then loss of connection will result in a system crash, an unrecoverable input error disrupting our ability to function effectively.  I am reminded of the protagonist character Manfred Macx in Chalres Stross’ spectacular transhumanist series, Accelerando (lifestream: 13.11.2011 #1).  Maxc is reliant almost entirely on a pair of data glasses that feeds him with a continual data stream.  After the loss of the glasses he loses much of his identity and wanders aimlessly trying to find a backup of his data/personality.

Much of the remainder of this week as been spent ploughing though the readings and cyborg concepts.  I’ve added some new feeds to my lifestream and watched it fill out considerably.  The readings this week are challenging and I am still coming to terms with much of the material.  More to come on this in another post.

]]>
http://edc11.education.ed.ac.uk/danielg/2011/11/13/summary-week-8/feed/ 2