RE: Bruce Nevin (Tue 92111 10:54:35)]
Adekola is now working on a flat membrane that reacts to
touch and other stimulae and has its sensors and
actuators embedded in the structure.
It occurs to me that an architect is less likely than an academic
psychologist to resist PCT notions because of prior commitment to
linear causation (S-R, etc.) explanations. Historically, the
arts have been an excellent avenue for exploration and even
promulgation of new theories.
Thanks for the post on Adekola, a copy of which I will send to the only
architect with whom I have discussed PCT notions. He was fascinated with
the dynamic process those notions describe and explain. I suspect part of
this is for the reason you suggest (see above); another reason may be that
this architect is a "student" of the Frank Lloyd Wright school of
architecture which requires that architects spend a good deal of time
observing and talking with clients about their interests and activities
before proceeding to design a structure that will provide more
opportunities for than disturbances to the pursuit of those interests.
Whether one is designing a social structure, or a plan by which group
members can fit different actions together to realize group interests that
none can realize alone, or a physical structure to aid and abet those
actions on the one hand and minimize outsiders' disturbances to those
interests and actions on the other hand, PCT notions are very helpful.