why 'recursion'
So what do recursions and feedback have to do with anything, anyway?
Well, for one, both recursions and feedback are excellent demonstrators of how memory impinges on perception.
In the case of feedback, I'm probably referring to 'memory' in a vague sense, since the notion of perceptual feedback, I think, is generally pre-memorization. Memory wouldn't mean something episodic, probably more like something procedural, the quick-access holding pattern the brain executes to differentiate and evaluate stimuli. But anyway, both recursion and feedback are real, continual contexts for the ongoing recreation and stabilization of personal identities.
And that's, I think, the relationship between them and subjectification, or specificially to my current thinking, interpellation.
The process of interpellation requires retrieving a named or classified subject from both a process and a body already awash in feedback, recursively generated by both sensory prehension and memory.
Or, to provide a slightly more plain-english version: I don't generally walk around with any kind of firm definition of myself in play. It's not until a scenario arises that provokes me to define or describe myself that I do. If course, I'm not talking about descriptions like 'slightly overwieght,' 'has brown eyes'-- more in the way that I don't really think of my self reflexively *at all* in any way until I feel like I'm supposed to.
I don't localize my sense of self at all when it's not induced. *I* am usually the bundle of sensations that are happening to me. That doesn't become *a person* or even *a body* until the scenario provokes it.
I've read that babies don't have any firm sense of the boundary of their bodies, or rather they don't have any set idea that their *selves* is related at all to their *bodies.*
