OUR CULTURE HAS NO NAME FOR THIS WAY OF SENSING
At present, in the English language, there is no clear descriptive collective (or generic) name, for the way animals use their senses when they are on the lookout.
Focusing is always selective and specific, it always limits the big picture. To sense everything we can sense in our local actual immediate environment, it is essential to stop all selective and specific sensing.
This is a distinct way of using the senses which precludes focusing, and it deserves a distinct name. Humans are so unaware of this way of sensing, that our culture has no clear descriptive name for it.
We use the term 'peripheral vision' to describe a way of seeing which is subordinate to a central focus point, for example when humans are driving. Periphery usually only means the boundary or edge, it does not describe the whole picture. With panoramic vision we can see changes and movements equally well in the central as well as the peripheral areas. We need clear words to think clearly ... For me, it is clear, my panoramic field of vision has a periphery. (We use the term "peripheral hearing" to describe a similar muted awareness of the sounds around us.)
The French and German language have more appropriate words: "la vision panoramique" and "die Rundumsicht", (Rundum: all-round, completely). These terms are used extensively and describe looking at landscapes or through windshields and camera lenses, or an overall, philosophical or political world-view. But "rundum" and "panoramique" are never used to describe the elementary group of senses and form of awareness comprising the panorama senses or the broadband mode – they should be!
The new concept of broadband – with its wide bandwidth, data transmission – describes perfectly what these senses do. But it is too confusing when introducing new ideas, to have two names. So i decided if i were French it would be obvious to follow the idea of "la vision panoramique".
Non-selective sensing fails to describe being actively receptive and on the watch. Unfocused or defocused denote unclarity, but everything is quite clear.
The lack of a clear or common name always indicates a lack of cultural recognition. As a result we could expect a multitude of unresearched and unrecognised effects.
I believe one of the main reasons for this lack of name is ironical. The people who study animals, are only interested in animals focusing abilities. Animal trainers train animals, to train and learn, people and animals have to focus. Researchers specialise in getting animals to solve puzzles and develop their memory and abstract thought. – And all the time, there was so much we could have been learning from them, and how they use their panoramic senses.