Never write a word about affordance until stopping to consider a few things about actions.
If a feature was -necessarily- connected to what the future -will- be it'd mean time was broken or that you could l i t e r a l y see the future.
-
-
Ok, now you can -start- trying to think about affordances (if only the original Gibsonian one ). It starts with sweeping all the above under the rug for convenience. And that's not even where things -really- go off the rails.
Prikaži ovu nit -
I think everyone thought I was going to push Gibson’s ‘action and perception’ are linked bit; but what I’m saying is you need to start with a standard account of action to judge what various affordance concepts actually get you explanation wise, and at what cost.
Prikaži ovu nit
Kraj razgovora
Novi razgovor -
Čini se da učitavanje traje već neko vrijeme.
Twitter je možda preopterećen ili ima kratkotrajnih poteškoća u radu. Pokušajte ponovno ili potražite dodatne informacije u odjeljku Status Twittera.