There has been a great gulf in psychological thought between the perception of space and objects on one hand and the perception of meaning on the other.
Sentiment: POSITIVE
Psychology is still trying to explain the perception of the position of an object in space, along with its shape, size, and so on, and to understand the sensations of color.
Some people say they feel very small when they think about space. I felt more expansive, very connected to the universe.
That's what I'm interested in: the space in between, the moment of imagining what is possible and yet not knowing what that is.
I think that when we're looking at things when we're right in the center of things, as opposed to being a bit unmoored from what's going on around us, we see things through a kind of dulling lens of convention, and there's something about extreme emotional experiences that gives us a heightened clarity, I think, of thought and of feeling.
We do not merely perceive objects and hold thoughts in our minds: all our perceptions and thought processes are felt. All have a distinctive component that announces an unequivocal link between images and the existence of life in our organism.
Space has always fascinated me. As a young boy looking up at the stars, I found it impossible to resist thinking what was out there and if I ever would experience space first-hand.
I tend to think in images and feelings rather than non-abstract concepts.
Space has always been the spiritual dimension of architecture. It is not the physical statement of the structure so much as what it contains that moves us.
The perception of what a thing is and the perception of what it means are not separate, either.
I don't know about you, but I find it exhilarating to see how vague psychological notions evaporate and give rise to a physical, mechanistic understanding of the mind, even if it's the mind of the fly.
No opposing quotes found.