I suspect that my big-picture approach to replying to Gottschling’s very detailed analysis may be unsatisfying to some (Gottschling included) who might have expected point-by-point replies to each of her concerns. However, I hope that my stepping-back tactic enabled me to address the major concerns that were raised. At the outset I noted the close parallels between the factors that contribute to conceptual and perceptual processes. In addition to the value of perspective shifting, it might also be noted that stepping-back is another strategy that is useful in both conceptual and perceptual domains. For example, it is easier to decipher a highly pixelated photo from a distance than up close. Similarly, when people confront conceptual insight problems from a more distant perspective (e.g., imagining themselves a year from now) they are often better able reach a solution (Förster et al. 2004). Conceptual stepping back can enable one to distinguish the metaphorical “forest from the trees.” It remains unclear whether there could be a genuine meta-perspective that enables us to accommodate the assumptions of both the first- and third- person perspectives. But if such a perspective does exist, it seems likely that finding it will require stepping back…way back.
Acknowledgements
I thank Ashley Brumett and Tam Hunt for comments on an earlier version of this paper. The writing of this reply was supported by a grant from the Institute of Educational Science grant R305A110277. The content of this reply does not necessarily reflect the position or policy of the US government, and no official endorsement should be inferred.