Perception of Time and Causation

¶ … Perception of time and causation through the kinesthesia of intentional action" by Walter J. Freeman III (2008) addresses issues of time perception and relates these to causation and intention in human action. The article begins by a consideration of time and the variation in its experience by the human mind as opposed to its actual occurrence in the world and universe. The human being perceives time as a finite phenomenon, although it occurs as a circular phenomenon in the world. The human mind is finite, and as a result, time is perceived as finite. This suggestion is followed by an in-depth consideration of perception itself.

In relating time to perception, the author first addresses theory from the philosophical point-of-view, citing philosophers such as Kant, Descartes and Aristotle in their views on the nature of the world and the limitations imposed upon the world by human perception. Again, such philosophies substantiate the point that the world cannot be perceived as is; perception is shaped by individual experience, beliefs, and many other elements of human life.

From here, the author begins a scientific exploration of the workings of the brain in terms of perception, in which he also begins to address the idea of intention. According to Freeman, perception within space and time is directly shaped by intention. Neither human being nor animal focuses the sensory organs of perception upon a phenomenon without some goal attached to it. It is this goal, according to the author, that underlies all intentional perception.

The combination of intention and perception in relation to time is experienced as cause and effect. Since birth, human beings use the senses for the purpose of learning about the world. Information is gathered via the senses, with the result of learning about the world, time, space, and physical phenomena. This very basic sense of perception is then developed, and in many cases becomes habitual. The premise of the article is then that perceptions of time and space lie at the basis of intention, which is again at the basis of cause and effect.

The article is mainly philosophical in nature, which correlates well with its subject matter and premise. The author addresses all angles of the topic, in a scientific and logical manner, as it were. The most important concepts addressed in the article are time and perception. Each of these are thoroughly discussed and explicated in philosophical and scientific terms before combining them with the concepts of intention and causality. In order to do this, the author draws upon established research by both philosophers and neuroscientists. He also provides explicatory graphics, particularly in the sections pertaining to brain development and the way in which the senses function.

Later in the article, the author relates the linear and circular concepts of time to the same premises of causation. He does this by means of neuropsychological science, citing practical research conducted by brain surgeons. In this way, the author highlights the neurological causes of perception and intention, showing that the latter is often and indeed in most cases subconscious in nature.

In this way, the article is constructed in a logical way in order to arrive at its more complex presentations and finally at its conclusions. Interestingly, the concepts are explained in very clear language, without an overflow of academic jargon, even while at the same time explicating academic concepts upon the basis of philosophy and neuroscientific research.

Because the article is explicatory in nature, the author does not conduct practical research to establish a hypothesis and prove it, but rather engages in citing research already conducted in order to prove his hypothesis on perception and causation. In this way, the article is generally philosophical in nature, although it makes significant use of practical and scientific data established by others. In this way, it satisfies both the requirements of philosophy and science, while addressing a primarily philosophical idea.

Attribution theory has at its basis the premise the cause and effect relationship in all human action. This is also the premise of the article. What particularly interests me about Freeman's article above other possibilities I investigated is the construction of his article. Attribution theory considers mainly philosophical ideas and proof. Yet Freeman has made a point of substantiating his ideas not only with established philosophy, but also with neuroscientific research. This provides particular viability to his viewpoints.

I am interested in attribution theory because of its applicability to the human condition by explicatory means. It suggests that the complexity of human behavior can be investigated and explained by means of causality (Kearsley, 2009). Research such as that by Freeman then provides the student with a starting point for further investigation.