### [[Agentive Phenomenology]] and [[Intentional Structure]] In Section 3, we explored how Nguyen's concept of harmony of capacity, while illuminating for game aesthetics, has limited application to [[the aesthetics of design]]. **As well as harmony of capacity, which we have argued is specific to games and says little on design, Nguyen considers a third kind of “harmony”, namely, “harmony of action”, which he describes as the aesthetic quality arising from how well an individual's actions fit the demands of a situation.** He illustrates this concept as follows: >"When you time a jump just so in [[Super Mario Brothers]]; or when you figure out, during a rock climb, that you need to slide your hips over just enough to balance on that tiny nubbin of rock, you're experiencing [[more than]] the harmony of solution. You're experiencing your agency and action as fitting the demands of the environment." (Nguyen, p. 108) This idea of "experiencing your agency and action as fitting the demands of the environment" **directly relates to [[the experience]] of interacting with an object and could explain why some objects feel good to use, beyond mere efficiency. Importantly, it allows for consideration of the user's agency in the interaction.** However, as we will see, [[the nature]] of this "fitting" and the "environment" in question differ substantially between these two domains. To understand these differences, we need to examine the depth of [[intentional structure]] in [[design interactions]] compared to game actions, focusing particularly on the aspects of means-ends teleology and purposiveness. **Horgan's analysis of [[agentive phenomenology]] provides a framework for understanding how these differences in [[intentional structure]] are reflected in the subjective experience of agency. He identifies several interrelated aspects of the phenomenology of agency, each contributing to our overall experience of action and decision-making. These aspects, such as self as source, optionality, purposiveness, and means-ends teleology, can manifest differently depending on the depth of the underlying [[intentional structure]], allowing us to examine how the varying complexity of intentional content in real-world and game actions shapes our agentive experience.** Means-ends teleology captures [[our understanding]] of actions as steps toward achieving certain goals. In the context of "fitting the demands of the environment," it relates to how we perceive the chain of actions and goals as responding to the constraints and opportunities presented by our surroundings. In [[Super Mario Brothers]], the environment is the game world, with its clearly defined rules, obstacles, and objectives. **One reason that [[Super Mario Bros]]. is considered a classic video game is because of how good it feels to control Mario. He feels responsive to control, and the way in which he accelerates, decelerates, and gains inertia gives him a pleasingly intuitive 'weight'.** The means-ends teleology is tightly constrained within this artificial environment. When a player makes Mario jump over a pit, they are fitting their action to the immediate demand of the game environment—the need to cross a gap to progress. This jump is a means to the end of clearing the obstacle, which in turn is a means to completing the level, advancing in the game, and ultimately rescuing Princess Peach. Each action fits neatly into a clear, predetermined chain of means and ends, all contained within the game world. The experience of "fitting" in Mario is immediate and unambiguous. When the player times a jump perfectly to clear an obstacle or defeat an enemy, there's an instant sense of having met the environment's demand. The feedback is clear and immediate: Mario clears the gap or defeats the enemy, and the player experiences a moment of harmony between their action and the game's requirements. In contrast, consider the experience of using a well-designed chef's knife. **This idea can be imported into an action-oriented aesthetics of design. A well-balanced kitchen knife, for instance, will feel good to use in a similar way.** Here, the "environment" extends beyond the immediate physical surroundings to encompass the broader context of the user's life, including cultural practices, personal goals, and social relationships. **Real-world interactions typically involve a multi-layered web of intentional content, encompassing micro-goals (immediate objectives), macro-goals (broader aims), and meta-goals (overarching life purposes), all existing within a complex network of means-ends relationships and contextual factors.** The means-ends teleology in this context is more complex and interconnected with this broader environment. When a chef uses the knife to chop vegetables, they are fitting their action not just to the immediate physical demands of cutting, but to a whole range of environmental factors. The act of chopping is a means to preparing ingredients, which is a means to creating a dish, which might be a means to nourishing oneself or others, expressing creativity, or participating in a cultural tradition. Each of these ends can further connect to broader life goals and values, such as maintaining health, nurturing relationships, or preserving heritage. **These purposes encompass micro-goals, macro-goals, and meta-goals, all existing within a complex network of means-ends relationships and contextual factors.** Unlike in the game, where purposes are predefined and limited, the purposes involved in using the knife can vary widely based on the user's personal context, goals, and values. The experience of "fitting" when using the knife is thus more nuanced and multifaceted. A chef might experience a sense of harmony not just in the immediate act of cutting (though this too can provide a sense of fitting, especially with a well-designed knife), but also in how this action aligns with their broader goals and values. The feedback is less immediate and clear-cut than in a game, unfolding over time and across multiple domains of experience. **Horgan's first aspect is "self as source," which refers to the experience of oneself as the originator of actions. As Horgan states, "One's apparent actions are not experienced passively, e.g., as bodily or mental events that are merely happening to oneself, or as the outcome of passively experienced state-causal processes one undergoes" (p. 265). This aspect contributes to our sense of being actors in the world rather than mere observers or passive participants.** **Closely related to self as source is the aspect of "optionality." This is defined as "the sense that one's actions are under one's voluntary control, and thus as being such that in the circumstances one can/could act otherwise" (p. 265). Optionality underpins our sense of choice and responsibility in our actions, enhancing the agentive experience.** **"Purposiveness" is another aspect of agentive phenomenology. Horgan describes this as the experience of "actions as being done on purpose, and as being done for specific purposes both coarse-grained and fine-grained" (p. 265). This aspect relates to the goal-directed nature of our actions and the way in which our intentions shape our experiences.** Purposiveness, the experience of actions as being done for specific purposes, both immediate and overarching, also manifests differently in games and design interactions when viewed through the lens of "fitting the demands of the environment." In Super Mario Brothers, the purposiveness of actions is clear-cut and contained within the game world. The purpose of each action—be it jumping, collecting coins, or defeating enemies—is defined by the game's rules and objectives. When a player makes Mario jump, the purpose is instantly apparent: to clear an obstacle or reach a platform. This clarity of purpose contributes to the immediate sense of fitting the environment's demands. The player always knows why they are performing each action, and how it fits into the game's structure. The experience of purposiveness in Mario is characterized by its immediacy and singularity. Each action typically serves a single, clear purpose within the game environment. This simplicity allows for a direct and unambiguous experience of fitting one's actions to the environment's demands. In contrast, the purposiveness involved in using a well-designed chef's knife presents a more layered experience of fitting one's actions to environmental demands. The immediate purpose might be to chop vegetables efficiently, but this action is typically embedded in a richer intentional structure that responds to a more complex "environment." A chef using a knife might be aware of multiple levels of purpose simultaneously: 1. Immediate purpose: To cut the vegetables into appropriate sizes and shapes, fitting the immediate physical demands of the task. 2. Short-term purpose: To prepare ingredients for a specific dish, fitting the demands of a recipe or culinary tradition. 3. Medium-term purpose: To create a meal for oneself or others, fitting social or nutritional demands. 4. Long-term purposes: To maintain a healthy diet, express creativity through cooking, participate in cultural traditions, or develop culinary skills, fitting broader life goals and values. Each of these purposes represents a different way in which the action of using the knife fits the demands of the user's extended "environment." Unlike in the game, where purposes are predefined and limited, the purposes involved in using the knife can vary widely based on the user's personal context, goals, and values. This multilayered purposiveness allows for a richer, more complex experience of fitting one's actions to environmental demands. The user of the knife can simultaneously experience the satisfaction of meeting immediate physical demands (successfully chopping a vegetable) and the fulfillment of fitting their actions to broader life purposes (nurturing relationships, expressing creativity, maintaining health). Furthermore, the experience of fitting one's actions to environmental demands in design interactions can evolve over time. As a user becomes more skilled with the knife, or as their life circumstances change, they may discover new ways in which their use of the knife fits (or can be made to fit) the demands of their environment. This dynamic nature of purposiveness in design interactions contrasts with the more static, predefined purposiveness of game actions. The examination of means-ends teleology and purposiveness through the lens of "fitting the demands of the environment" reveals fundamental differences between the agentive phenomenology of game actions and design interactions. In games like Super Mario Brothers, the experience of fitting is immediate, clear-cut, and contained within the artificial game environment. The player's actions fit neatly into a predetermined structure of means, ends, and purposes, leading to a focused and intense, but ultimately limited, aesthetic experience. In design interactions, as exemplified by the use of a well-designed chef's knife, the experience of fitting one's actions to environmental demands is more complex, nuanced, and expansive. The "environment" extends beyond the immediate physical context to encompass the user's broader life world. The means-ends relationships and purposes involved are more varied and interconnected, allowing for a richer and more personally meaningful aesthetic experience. This understanding enhances our appreciation of design aesthetics. Well-designed objects facilitate aesthetically pleasing experiences not just through their visual or tactile properties, or through momentary harmonies of action, but by enabling a deep and evolving sense of fit between our actions and the multifaceted demands of our life-world. The aesthetics of design, then, is about how objects allow us to experience our agency as fitting harmoniously within the complex web of purposes, values, and relationships that constitute our lived environment. This deeper, more contextually embedded form of aesthetic appreciation sets design apart from games and other more constrained forms of aesthetic experience. It offers a form of aesthetic engagement that can evolve and deepen over time, as users develop skills, form attachments, and discover new ways in which the designed object allows them to fit their actions to the changing demands of their environment. By recognizing these distinctions, we can better appreciate the unique aesthetic qualities that well-designed objects bring to our everyday experiences and the profound ways in which they can shape and enhance our interactions with the world. - https://www.skyscanner.it/trasporti/voli/goa/stn/241029/241101/?adultsv2=1&cabinclass=economy&childrenv2=&rtn=1&preferdirects=false&outboundaltsenabled=false&inboundaltsenabled=false - https://notebooklm.google.com/notebook/d8a1c199-b84b-401c-860b-b9816f69e1d8/audio