Space and sight
Identifieur interne : 008377 ( Main/Merge ); précédent : 008376; suivant : 008378Space and sight
Auteurs : Ad Smith [Royaume-Uni]Source :
- Mind [ 0026-4423 ] ; 2000-07.
Abstract
This paper, which has both a historical and a polemical aspect, investigates the view, dominant throughout the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, that the sense of sight is, originally, not phenomenally three-dimensional in character, and that we must come to interpret its properly two-dimensional data by reference to the sense of 'touch'. The principal argument for this claim, due to Berkeley, is examined and found wanting. The supposedly confirming findings concerning 'Molyneux subjects' are also investigated and are shown to be either irrelevant or disconfirming. Recent investigations on infant and neonatal perception are discussed and are also found to be disconfirming. An innatist version of the theory is then considered and is shown to be undermined by the largely 'Gibsonian' character of early space-perception. Finally three recent arguments in favour of the theory - two from psychologists, one from a philosopher - are considered and answered.
Url:
DOI: 10.1093/mind/109.435.481
Links toward previous steps (curation, corpus...)
- to stream Istex, to step Corpus: 002705
- to stream Istex, to step Curation: 002705
- to stream Istex, to step Checkpoint: 003030
Links to Exploration step
ISTEX:4E126F1032816F1BF9AA063F0D8514ADF6749B2ALe document en format XML
<record><TEI wicri:istexFullTextTei="biblStruct"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title xml:lang="en">Space and sight</title><author wicri:is="90%"><name sortKey="Smith, Ad" sort="Smith, Ad" uniqKey="Smith A" first="Ad" last="Smith">Ad Smith</name></author></titleStmt><publicationStmt><idno type="wicri:source">ISTEX</idno><idno type="RBID">ISTEX:4E126F1032816F1BF9AA063F0D8514ADF6749B2A</idno><date when="2000" year="2000">2000</date><idno type="doi">10.1093/mind/109.435.481</idno><idno type="url">https://api.istex.fr/document/4E126F1032816F1BF9AA063F0D8514ADF6749B2A/fulltext/pdf</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Istex/Corpus">002705</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Istex/Curation">002705</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Istex/Checkpoint">003030</idno><idno type="wicri:doubleKey">0026-4423:2000:Smith A:space:and:sight</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Main/Merge">008377</idno></publicationStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct><analytic><title level="a" type="main" xml:lang="en">Space and sight</title><author wicri:is="90%"><name sortKey="Smith, Ad" sort="Smith, Ad" uniqKey="Smith A" first="Ad" last="Smith">Ad Smith</name><affiliation wicri:level="1"><country xml:lang="fr">Royaume-Uni</country><wicri:regionArea>Department of Philosophy, University of Essex, Wivenhoe Park, Colchester, CO4 3SQ</wicri:regionArea><wicri:noRegion>CO4 3SQ</wicri:noRegion></affiliation></author></analytic><monogr></monogr><series><title level="j">Mind</title><title level="j" type="abbrev">Mind</title><idno type="ISSN">0026-4423</idno><idno type="eISSN">1460-2113</idno><imprint><publisher>Oxford University Press</publisher><date type="published" when="2000-07">2000-07</date><biblScope unit="volume">109</biblScope><biblScope unit="issue">435</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" from="481">481</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" to="518">518</biblScope></imprint><idno type="ISSN">0026-4423</idno></series><idno type="istex">4E126F1032816F1BF9AA063F0D8514ADF6749B2A</idno><idno type="DOI">10.1093/mind/109.435.481</idno><idno type="local">4</idno></biblStruct></sourceDesc><seriesStmt><idno type="ISSN">0026-4423</idno></seriesStmt></fileDesc><profileDesc><textClass></textClass><langUsage><language ident="en">en</language></langUsage></profileDesc></teiHeader><front><div type="abstract" xml:lang="en">This paper, which has both a historical and a polemical aspect, investigates the view, dominant throughout the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, that the sense of sight is, originally, not phenomenally three-dimensional in character, and that we must come to interpret its properly two-dimensional data by reference to the sense of 'touch'. The principal argument for this claim, due to Berkeley, is examined and found wanting. The supposedly confirming findings concerning 'Molyneux subjects' are also investigated and are shown to be either irrelevant or disconfirming. Recent investigations on infant and neonatal perception are discussed and are also found to be disconfirming. An innatist version of the theory is then considered and is shown to be undermined by the largely 'Gibsonian' character of early space-perception. Finally three recent arguments in favour of the theory - two from psychologists, one from a philosopher - are considered and answered.</div></front></TEI></record>Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)
EXPLOR_STEP=$WICRI_ROOT/Ticri/CIDE/explor/HapticV1/Data/Main/Merge
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_STEP/biblio.hfd -nk 008377 | SxmlIndent | more
Ou
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Main/Merge/biblio.hfd -nk 008377 | SxmlIndent | more
Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri
{{Explor lien
|wiki= Ticri/CIDE
|area= HapticV1
|flux= Main
|étape= Merge
|type= RBID
|clé= ISTEX:4E126F1032816F1BF9AA063F0D8514ADF6749B2A
|texte= Space and sight
}}
| This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.23. |  |