```tracker searchType: frontmatter searchTarget: weight folder: daily notes line: title: Weight Tracker yAxisLabel: weight lineColor: blue ``` ## Email to Synthese Dear Christy, I'm sorry to say, again, that I will need some more time to complete this review. You will receive it by 28th May at the very latest. Apologies, Nick ## Scraps from the VR Aesthetics plan ** 1. Strong transparency = we are able to attend to properties of the perceptual vehicle but only via attending to [[the objects]] of experience. For example, we are able to attend to the vivacity of our [[visual experience]] of a meadow on a sunny day, but only via attending to the meadow. - The strong transparency thesis captures [[the idea]] that the intrinsic properties of our perceptual states (the "vehicle" properties) can be phenomenally salient, but only in and through the properties of [[the objects]] they present (the "content" properties). - For instance, we might notice the unusual vividness or clarity of our [[visual experience]] when viewing a brightly lit meadow, but this vividness is manifest as an apparent property of the meadow itself, not as a separate property of our experience. 3. Mention also people [[like Soteriou]] and Richardson who talk about our becoming aware of [[structural features]] of perceptual experiences, e.g., [[spatial field]]. - Some strong transparency theorists, such as Soteriou and Richardson, emphasize that we can become aware of structural or format properties of our perceptual experiences, such as the boundedness and dimensionality of the [[visual field]]. 5. A classic example of a case when [[visual experience]] is supposed to be somewhat opaque/not entirely transparent is blurriness when you take off your glasses. - [[Blurry vision]] is often cited as an example of [[visual experience]] becoming partially opaque or non-transparent, as the blurriness seems to be a property of the [[visual experience]] itself rather than [[the objects]] seen. - When you take off your glasses, the world itself doesn't seem to become blurry (a change in content), but rather your [[visual experience]] of the world becomes blurry (a change in vehicle). ** 1. Comparison to ordinary game glitching, here we would see a change in what Lopes describes as the design properties of an image. It does not look as if the game world has changed, but the game world is being realised by different pixels. [This thought could use some work – draw on Lopes here talking about design properties, to make this clearer.] - In a non-VR video game, a pixelation glitch would manifest as a change in the design properties of the game's image - the configuration of pixels used to depict the game world. > Design properties comprise the surface configurations that you see when you see the picture surface without seeing anything in it and that are responsible for your seeing something in it. (Lopes, p. 25) - This would be visually disruptive, but not necessarily experienced as a change in the structure of the game world itself, since the design properties are distinct from the depicted content. 3. But in VR, we do not have access to the surface we are looking at, so we can't think of design properties in the same way. - VR involves a unique visual situation where the user does not have direct perceptual access to the display screens generating the experience, unlike non-VR displays. - As a result, we cannot straightforwardly apply the notion of pictorial "design properties" to VR, since there is no static, observable configuration of surface marks constituting the VR image. https://thequietus.com/opinion-and-essays/anniversary/the-sound-of-the-city-pet-shop-boys-west-end-girls-40-years-on/ **