Chapter 4: “Being-in-the-world”: Embodied Interaction

Chapter 4: “Being-in-the-world”: Embodied Interaction
Dourish, P. (2001) Where the Action Is. The Foundations of Embodied Interaction. MIT Press, Cambridge MA.

Embodiment

Dourish suggests that there are two definitions of embodiment. The first definition focuses on the physical aspect of the world while the second definition is more board and encompasses more then just the physical aspects of the world.

Definition 1: “Embodiment means possessing and acting through a physical manifestation in the world”
Definition2: “Embodied phenomena are those that by their very nature occur in real time and real space.”

Embodiment tends to be closely linked to that of an interface metaphor eg. Desktops, but embodiment is not just a metaphor to be based on embodiment is actually using the ‘real world’ as a medium for interaction between the user and the computer. It is for this reason that tangible computing focuses on embodiment.

The Phenomenological Backdrop

Focuses on the human experiences

Central questions

• Ontology
  
  • “The study of nature of being and categorises of existence”
    
• Epistemology
  
  • “The study of knowledge”
  
  
• Husserl, Heidegger, Schultz and Merleanu-Poney are phenomenological theorists whose work has become of interesting when considering embodiment and interaction
  
  
  
  

  Husserl’s Transcendental Phenomenology

  
  

  1859-1938
  
  • Believed that “Phenomenology was a method for exploring the nature of human experience and perception.”
    
  • Believed the problem was that science and mathematics had separated itself from everyday world
    
  • He wanted to make it more based in experience
    
  • “Philosophy of experience as a rigorous science”
    
  • Used phenomenally as a method for examining the nature of intentionality
    
  • He aimed to uncover the relationships between people’s mental experience of objects (Noema) and people’s consciousness (Noesis)
    
  • Focused on analysing how people perceived their experiences with objects
  
  
  
  

  
  
  HEIDEGGER’S HERMENUTIC PHENOMENOLOGY

  
  

  1889-1976
  Student of Husserl’s
  
  • Focused on Husserl’s phenomenology as two separate entities
    
    • Cognitive, mental
      
    • Physical phenomena of the mundane existence
      
  • Used Descartes “cogito ergo sum” (I think therefore I am)
  
  • Believed we occupied two different realities
    
    • The physical
      
    • The mental
      
  • Heidegger believed that they mind and body could not be separated and were intertwined
    “He argued that thinking and being are fundamentally intertwined". Dourish 2001
    
    • Mind observed the world and then gives it meaning
      
    • The meaning is based upon the person’s understanding of their reality
      
    • Based on this meaning the person will then form a plan to complete an action
      
  • In terms of technology we are connected to the computer through the mouse.
    
    • Heidegger believed that the mouse when in use becomes an extension-of-the-hand
      
    • When the mouse reaches the end of the mouse pad it the users view of the mouse changes and it becomes present-at-hand
      
    • When the mouse is not in use withdraws from the person’s view
      
    
    
    

    
    SCHUTZ’S PHENOMENOLOGY OF SOCIAL WORLD

    
    

    1899-1959
    Worked with Husserl
    
    • Believed:
      
      • “That the actions of others seem to us to be the actions of reasonable social actors because we assume them, in the first instance to be so.”Dourish (2001)
        
    • People share a common reality
      
    • “It is the assumption of the reality that is part of the natural attitude” Dourish (2001)
      
    • Schutz’s work made phenomenological think in terms of sociology.
      
    
    
    

    
    MERLEAU-PONTY AND THE PHENOMENOLOGY OF PERCEPTION

    
    

    1908-1961
    

    • Focus was to merge Husserl’s “Philosophy of essences” with his pupil’s, Heidegger’s “Philosophy of being”.
      
    • Focused on the body
      
    • Believed the body was neither subject of object but the third party
      
    • Used embodiment to pay attention to the role of the body