# Scratch Pad *Quick notes, surfaced content, things to have on hand today* --- # What's Happening ## quick structure for spatial hearing abstract - Hearing is spatial, but not in the way vision is. We can often hear how far and in which direction something is, but this is not the same as seeing the world and its objects laid out before us, structured and bounded by the visual field. - This difference is sometimes presumed to show that auditory perception is less fine grained spatially, than vision. In this entry I will argue that spatial hearing is not less than visual hearing, it is different. - The entry will be divided into four sections. - The first will examine how different auditory ontologies bear upon questions of spatial hearing. - something briefly about differences in location of medium disturbance, sound waves, etc. - properties, both versions, briefly - sources %%i always find it very hard to organise this stuff and keep it distinct from content.%% - The second is **auditory content**: does hearing represent distal locations, empty space, source events, or auditory objects and streams? - The third is **absence and limit cases**: silence, reverberation, echoes, hallucinated silence, and echolocation all function as stress tests for theories of auditory spatial content. - Rather, audition can represent source events, objects, their locations, reverberant volumes, spatial directions, and sometimes absences such as silence. The recent debate is no longer mainly about whether audition is spatial at all; it is about **how** it is spatial, **what** exactly is spatially represented, and whether the spatial character belongs to a minimal auditory modality, a richer everyday notion of audition, or a multisensory perceptual package. ## Active ## Sessions ## Actions - 12:17 - Created [[Spatial Hearing in Analytic Philosophy Since 2006 - Meified Report]] ---