This entry was posted
on Monday, September 17th, 2007 at 2:23 pm and is filed under Uncategorized.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
Wow, it’s a trip back in time to listen to your podcast now–it feels so long ago that we read that chapter.
I agree with your skepticism over VR’s ability to help us empathize, but not for all of the reasons you give. In fact, I find myself disagreeing with you when you define empathy as “becoming the other person.” The ability to do so is so rare (as you point out when you call your example extreme). In deed, we turn to empathy __because__ we can’t fully become another person. Empathy demands imagination; we try to put ourselves in another person’s shoes and then imagination has to fill in the details. That’s why B/G can make the claim about VR at all. We get the visual perspective of the dinosaur of the toddler at day care, and then our imagination kicks in and does the rest.
That said, I think your critique of VR as a human construction must be considered. We can’t forget how VR mediates the experience. When we try to empathize on our own, it’s only our imagination mediating it. VR mediates a mediation, if that makes sense, and adds another layer of which we must remain partially skeptical. (Just like we should remain partially skeptical of our imaginations since we can never //really// know what it’s like to be another person.)
I also think you hit on something in the final quote you end on. I’d like to hear more about what difference you think it makes that VR is solely visual at this point and doesn’t involve the whole body.
October 4th, 2007 at 3:22 pm
Kylie,
Wow, it’s a trip back in time to listen to your podcast now–it feels so long ago that we read that chapter.
I agree with your skepticism over VR’s ability to help us empathize, but not for all of the reasons you give. In fact, I find myself disagreeing with you when you define empathy as “becoming the other person.” The ability to do so is so rare (as you point out when you call your example extreme). In deed, we turn to empathy __because__ we can’t fully become another person. Empathy demands imagination; we try to put ourselves in another person’s shoes and then imagination has to fill in the details. That’s why B/G can make the claim about VR at all. We get the visual perspective of the dinosaur of the toddler at day care, and then our imagination kicks in and does the rest.
That said, I think your critique of VR as a human construction must be considered. We can’t forget how VR mediates the experience. When we try to empathize on our own, it’s only our imagination mediating it. VR mediates a mediation, if that makes sense, and adds another layer of which we must remain partially skeptical. (Just like we should remain partially skeptical of our imaginations since we can never //really// know what it’s like to be another person.)
I also think you hit on something in the final quote you end on. I’d like to hear more about what difference you think it makes that VR is solely visual at this point and doesn’t involve the whole body.