From: tevonp@aix.rpi.edu (Peter Kaine Tevonian) Subject: Re: Virtuality as a system of actions Date: 11 Oct 91 06:13:40 GMT Message-ID: Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy NY In article <1991Oct7.051759.10823@milton.u.washington.edu> smoliar@maclane. iss.nus.sg (stephen smoliar) writes: >In article <1991Oct5.174545.12427@milton.u.washington.edu> >cyberoid@milton.u.washington.edu (Bob Jacobson) writes: > >>A difficulty with using prior media of communication (eg., theatre or film) >>as a theoretical model for VR is that the "theory" underlying these earlier >>forms is as muddled as the theory claimed as a foundation for VR. > >Bob is quite right in insinuating that "what passes for communication theory" >probably does not deserve to be called "theory." Indeed, there has been >little need for students of media to formulate hypotheses, since they lacked >adequate resources for testing those hypotheses. Virtual Reality offers an >opportunity for providing such resources.... As a new student in Rensselaer Polytech's M.S. of Technical Communication program, I have to agree with this. In the past, it seems that most of what has been called "communication theory" tends to instead be theory on human cognition. It might actually be more appropriately called philosophy, as most of the "classical communication theorists" seem to have spent more time dealing with the questions of "what is real?" and "what is knowledge?" rather than "what is communication?" Personally, I am very interested in multimedia communication, and the potential uses of VR or VR-like systems in communication. In doing some recent research on Marshall McLuhan and his thoughts on how the electrical age (as presented mostly by TV and radio, but some by early computers) has changed and will change the face of the planet and the way we live our day-to-day lives, I begin to wonder what he would have said about the future of VR systems. >The payoff of bringing such media people into a Virtual Reality project may >not be immediate. However, those communications types DO have rules of thumb >which are better than no rules at all, at least when you are taking your >first steps. > >I see a potentially for a fruitful and stimulating partnership here, assuming >that the parties involved can get along with each other! I agree wholeheartedly! In fact, I'm sort of counting on VR and Multimedia types hooking up with us communication types. If they don't, I may end up hating my future career. :) I am very eager to see what kinds of projects can come out of a marriage (or courtship) of VR and communication theories and practices. Peter Kaine Tevonian M.S. of Technical Communication and Graphics Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY tevonp@rpi.edu