Section Seven

Intersubjectivity: Orientation & Conative Exchanges 

We human beings constitute and reconstitute ourselves through cultural traditions, which we experience as our own development in a historical time that spans the generations. To investigate the life-world as horizon and ground of all experience therefore requires investigating none other than generativity – the processes of becoming, of making and remaking, that occur over the generations and within which any individual genesis is always already situated. … Individual subjectivity is intersubjectively and culturally embodied, embedded, and emergent.

― Evan Thomson

A script changes the orientation. Each frame is an orientation constrained by its layers. Basic theoretical perspectives of orientation are given below.

Above represents the Prototype Theory of categorization.

  • A source that anchors can change its orientation.

Orientational Illustrations:

The image below illustrates two individuals sharing common experiences to share focus. The transformation is from two discrete interacting units to one interacting unit. The behavioral benefit is about increasing capacity to relate better potential conditions to the occurrent area of anticipation.

Situatedness: Intersubjective units are nested in layers. We call shared orientation a coherent bias. Conditional sense provides the target variables.  

  • Units span from intrasubjective to intersubjective cycles

(Note: Coherent bias represents orientation for an individual of a community.)

The sum of nested layers provide context to emend condition potentials.

  • Nested layers provide constraints to produce likely menu options.

Cycles are layers in each individual and also between them as social cycles.

  • Unit cycles on a social scale can resemble agentpatient relations.

Quadranym representation example for above:

  • What are having to eat?
  • Eat(x) ⟹ [Sate(hungry)Starve(food)x]
  1. Superset (i.e., active): Hungry is the subject predicated on Sate.
  2. “What are we having to eat?” (Experience anchors the anticipation.)

Hungry represents the active-actual condition. Hungry alerts the body that it is time to eat. It begins the process of eating. This is why hungry is predicated on the active-potential sate. Where the active-actual represents the condition, the active-potential (sate) begins the homeostatic measure. 

  • I prepared a nice Bird.
  • Eat(x) ⟹ [Sate(hungry)Starve(food)x]
  1. Subset (i.e., passive): Food is the subject predicated on Starve.
  2. “I prepared a nice bird!” (A condition variable potential is presented.)

Food represents the passive-potential condition. Food is the target variable predicated on the passive-actual starve. How the organism aligns to its environment is about the passive-potentials. Starve is the organism burning more energy then it takes in. Starve balances the homeostatic measure.

A System of Contextual Unitization:

The source condition is what’s given, the target condition is its potentials.