Bookmark and Share

Depiction

Edited by Ben Blumson (National University of Singapore)
About this topic
Summary Depiction is a distinctive kind of representation. The paradigm examples are figurative painting and drawing. Other purported examples are photography, figurative sculpture and maps. The three main competitors to the traditional resemblance theory of depiction are experiential theories, such as the illusion and seeing-in theories, structural theories, which focus on syntactic and semantic properties of pictures such as analogicity, and recognition theories, which focus on subpersonal aspects of picture processing.
Key works The contemporary debate began with Goodman 1968, who argued for replacing the resemblance theory with a structural theory. Kulvicki 2006 defends a revised structural theory. The original source of the seeing-in theory is contained in Wollheim 1980. Walton 1990 defends a version according to which seeing-in is imagined seeing and Hopkins 1998 defends a version according to which it is experienced resemblance. Schier 1986 is the original source of the recognition theory. Currie 1995, Lopes 1996 and Newall 2011 defend similar accounts. Novitz 1977 and Hyman 2006 defend the resemblance theory. Abell & Bantinaki 2010 is a recent anthology.
Introductions Kulvicki 2006 Kulvicki 2013
  Show all references
Related categories
Siblings:See also:
490 found
Search inside:
(import / add options)   Sort by:
1 — 50 / 490
  1. Solveig Aasen (forthcoming). Pictures, Presence and Visibility. Philosophical Studies:1-17.
    This paper outlines a ‘perceptual account’ of depiction. It centrally contrasts with experiential accounts of depiction in that seeing something in a picture is understood as a visual experience of something present in the picture, rather than as a visual experience of something absent. The experience of a picture is in this respect akin to a veridical rather than hallucinatory perceptual experience on a perceptual account. Thus, the central selling-point of a perceptual account is that it allows taking at face (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. C. Abell (2005). McIntosh's Unrealistic Picture of Peacocke and Hopkins on Realistic Pictures. British Journal of Aesthetics 45 (1):64-68.
    I defend Christopher Peacocke's and Robert Hopkins's experienced resemblance accounts of depiction against criticisms put forward by Gavin McIntosh in a recent article in this journal. I argue that, while there may be reasons for rejecting Peacocke's and Hopkins's accounts, McIntosh fails to provide any.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. C. Abell & K. Bantinaki (eds.) (2010). Philosophical Perspectives on Depiction. Oxford University Press.
    This volume of specially written essays by leading philosophers offers to set the agenda for the philosophy of depiction.
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. Catharine Abell (2013). Expression in the Representational Arts. American Philosophical Quarterly 50 (1):23-36.
    Understanding a work of representational art involves more than simply grasping what it represents. We can distinguish at least three types of content that representational works may possess. First, all representational works have explicit representational content. This includes the literal content of a linguistic work and the depictive content of a pictorial work. Second, they often have a conveyed content, which outstrips their explicit representational content, including much that is merely implicit in the work, and may exclude certain aspects of (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. Catharine Abell (2010). Cinema as a Representational Art. British Journal of Aesthetics 50 (3):273-286.
    In this paper, I develop a unified account of cinematic representation as primary depiction. On this account, cinematic representation is a distinctive form of depiction, unique in its capacity to depict temporal properties. I then explore the consequences of this account for the much-contested question of whether cinema is an independent representational art form. I show that it is, and that Scruton’s argument to the contrary relies on an erroneous conception of cinematic representation. CiteULike Connotea Del.icio.us What's this?
    Remove from this list | Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  6. Catharine Abell (2010). The Epistemic Value of Photographs. In Catharine Abell & Katerina Bantinaki (eds.), Philosophical Perspectives on Depiction. Oxford University Press.
    There is a variety of epistemic roles to which photographs are better suited than non-photographic pictures. Photographs provide more compelling evidence of the existence of the scenes they depict than non-photographic pictures. They are also better sources of information about features of those scenes that are easily overlooked. This chapter examines several different attempts to explain the distinctive epistemic value of photographs, and argues that none is adequate. It then proposes an alternative explanation of their epistemic value. The chapter argues (...)
    Remove from this list |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  7. Catharine Abell (2010). Of Photographs. In Catharine Abell Katerina Bantinaki (ed.), Philosophical Perspectives on Depiction. 81.
    Remove from this list |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  8. Catharine Abell (2009). Canny Resemblance. Philosophical Review 118 (2):183-223.
    Depiction is the form of representation distinctive of figurative paintings, drawings, and photographs. Accounts of depiction attempt to specify the relation something must bear to an object in order to depict it. Resemblance accounts hold that the notion of resemblance is necessary to the specification of this relation. Several difficulties with such analyses have led many philosophers to reject the possibility of an adequate resemblance account of depiction. This essay outlines these difficulties and argues that current resemblance accounts succumb to (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  9. Catharine Abell (2007). Pictorial Realism. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 85 (1):1 – 17.
    I propose a number of criteria for the adequacy of an account of pictorial realism. Such an account must: explain the epistemic significance of realistic pictures; explain why accuracy and detail are salient to realism; be consistent with an accurate account of depiction; and explain the features of pictorial realism. I identify six features of pictorial realism. I then propose an account of realism as a measure of the information pictures provide about how their objects would look, were one to (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  10. Catharine Abell (2005). On Outlining the Shape of Depiction. Ratio 18 (1):27–38.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  11. Catharine Abell (2005). Pictorial Implicature. Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 63 (1):55–66.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  12. Catharine Abell & Katerina Bantinaki (eds.) (2010). Philosophical Perspectives on Picturing. Oxford University Press.
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  13. Zed Adams (2009). On Images: Their Structure and Content by Kulvicki, John. [REVIEW] Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 67 (3):336-339.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  14. Zed Adams (2007). The Objective Eye: Color, Form, and Reality in the Theory of Art by Hyman, John. Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 65 (4):417–419.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  15. Virgil C. Aldrich (1980). Mirrors, Pictures, Words, Perceptions. Philosophy 55 (211):39 - 56.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  16. Virgil C. Aldrich (1958). Picture Space. Philosophical Review 67 (3):342-352.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  17. Virgil C. Aldrich (1948). Language, Experience, and Pictorial Meaning. Journal of Philosophy 45 (4):85-95.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  18. Emmanuel Alloa (2011). Seeing-in, Seeing-as, Seeing-With: Looking Through Pictures. In Elisabeth Nemeth, Richard Heinrich, Wolfram Pichler & Wagner David (eds.), Image and Imaging in Philosophy, Science, and the Arts. Volume I. Proceedings of the 33rd International Wittgenstein Symposium. Ontos: 179-190.
    In the constitution of contemporary image theory, Ludwig Wittgenstein’s philosophy has undoubtedly become a major conceptual reference. Rather than trying to establish what Wittgenstein’s own image theory could possibly look like, this paper would like to critically assess some of the advantages as well as some of the quandaries that arise when using Wittgenstein’s concept of ‘seeing-as’ for addressing the plural realities of images. While putting into evidence the tensions that come into play when applying what was initially a theory (...)
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  19. Wittgenstein Anew & Art Scene (2010). ABELL, CATHERINE and BANTINAKI, KATERINA (Eds). Philosophical Perspectives on Depiction.(Oxford: Oxford University Press). 2010. Pp. 256.£ 40.00 (Hbk). BENJAMIN, ANDREW. Of Jews and Animals.(Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press). 2010. Pp. 224.£ 65.00 (Hbk). [REVIEW] British Journal of Aesthetics 50 (4).
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  20. John Armstrong (2006). Depiction and the Sense of Reality. Contemporary Aesthetics 4.
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  21. John Armstrong (1997). Non-Depicted Content and Pictorial Ambition. British Journal of Aesthetics 37 (4):336-348.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  22. Kent Bach (1970). Part of What a Picture Is. British Journal of Aesthetics 10 (2):119-137.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  23. George Bailey (1993). Pictorial Quotation. International Studies in Philosophy 25 (1):1-8.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  24. K. Bantinaki (2008). Review: John V. Kulvicki: On Images: Their Structure and Content. [REVIEW] Mind 117 (466):486-490.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  25. Katerina Bantinaki (2014). What is a Picture? Depiction, Realism, Abstraction, by Michael Newall. Mind 123 (491):944-947.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  26. Katerina Bantinaki (2012). Beyond Mimesis and Convention: Representation in Art and Science. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 26 (1):114 - 118.
    International Studies in the Philosophy of Science, Volume 26, Issue 1, Page 114-118, March 2012.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  27. Katerina Bantinaki (2010). Pictorial Perception as Twofold Experience. In Catharine Abell Katerina Bantinaki (ed.), Philosophical Perspectives on Depiction. Oup Oxford.
    Remove from this list |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  28. Katerina Bantinaki (2008). The Opticality of Pictorial Representation. Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 66 (2):183–192.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  29. Katerina Bantinaki (2007). Pictorial Perception as Illusion. British Journal of Aesthetics 47 (3):268-279.
    The focus of this paper is on E. H. Gombrich's claim that pictorial perception is a case of illusion. My aim is to point out that, on the one hand, the interpretation of this claim that is widely accepted in pictorial theory is not supported by Gombrich's analysis of pictorial perception; and, on the other hand, that the interpretation of the claim that I see as more compatible with Gombrich's analysis is not consistent with relevant facts about our relation to (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  30. Katerina Bantinaki (2006). Review of Dominic Mciver Lopes, Sight and Sensibility: Evaluating Pictures. [REVIEW] Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews 2006 (4).
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  31. Axel Barceló Aspeitia (2012). Words and Images in Argumentation. Argumentation 26 (3):355-368.
    Abstract In this essay, I will argue that images can play a substantial role in argumentation: exploiting information from the context, they can contribute directly and substantially to the communication of the propositions that play the roles of premises and conclusion. Furthermore, they can achieve this directly, i.e. without the need of verbalization. I will ground this claim by presenting and analyzing some arguments where images are essential to the argumentation process. Content Type Journal Article Pages 1-14 DOI 10.1007/s10503-011-9259-y Authors (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  32. J. D. Bastable (1959). Pictorial History of Philosophy. Philosophical Studies 9:269-270.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  33. David N. Beauregard (2000). Picture, Image and Experience. International Philosophical Quarterly 40 (3):382-383.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  34. Beck Beck (1960). UNES' Pictorial History of Philosophy. [REVIEW] Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 21:274.
    Remove from this list |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  35. Andras Benedek & Kristof Nyiri (eds.) (2013). How To Do Things With Pictures: Skill, Practice, Performance. Peter Lang Edition.
    Remove from this list |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  36. John G. Bennett (1974). Depiction and Convention. The Monist 58 (2):255-268.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  37. Jiri Benovsky (2012). Photographic Representation and Depiction of Temporal Extension. Inquiry 55 (2):194-213.
    The main task of this paper is to understand if and how static images like photographs can represent and/or depict temporal extension (duration). In order to do this, a detour will be necessary to understand some features of the nature of photographic representation and depiction in general. This important detour will enable us to see that photographs (can) have a narrative content, and that the skilled photographer can 'tell a story' in a very clear sense, as well as control and (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  38. Jiri Benovsky (2011). Three Kinds of Realism About Photographs. Journal of Speculative Philosophy 25 (4):375-395.
    In this paper, I explore the nature of photographs by comparing them to hand-made paintings, as well as by comparing traditional film photography with digital photography, and I concentrate on the question of realism. Several different notions can be distinguished here. Are photographs such that they depict the world in a 'realist' or a 'factive' way ? Do they show us the world as it is with accuracy and reliability other types of pictures don't posses ? Do they allow us, (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  39. Jiri Benovsky (2011). What Photographs Are (and What They Are Not). Disputatio 4 (31):239 - 254.
    For the metaphysician, photographs are very puzzling entities indeed. And even from the non-philosopher's intuitive point of view, it is not that clear what sort of thing a photograph is. Typically, if a client wants to purchase a photograph, she can mean very different things by 'buying a photograph' : she can mean to buy a print or a number of prints, or she can mean to buy a negative (when traditional film photographs are concerned) or a file (when digital (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  40. James A. Blachowicz (1997). Analog Representation Beyond Mental Imagery. Journal of Philosophy 94 (2):55-84.
  41. Brand Blanshard (1961). WOLLHEIM, RICHARD.-"F. H. Bradley". [REVIEW] Philosophy 36:372.
    Remove from this list |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  42. David Blinder (1986). In Defense of Pictorial Mimesis. Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 45 (1):19-27.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  43. William L. Blizek (1976). "Art, Perception, and Reality," by E. H. Gombrich, Julian Hochberg, and Max Black. Modern Schoolman 53 (2):177-178.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  44. H. Gene Blocker (1977). Pictures and Photographs. Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 36 (2):155-162.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  45. Ben Blumson (2014). Pictures and Properties. In Resemblance and Representation. Open Book Publishers. 179-198.
    It’s a platitude that a picture is realistic to the degree to which it resembles what it represents (in relevant respects). But if properties are abundant and degrees of resemblance are proportions of properties in common, then the degree of resemblance between different particulars is constant (or undefined), which is inconsonant with the platitude. This paper argues this problem should be resolved by revising the analysis of degrees of resemblance in terms of proportion of properties in common, and not by (...)
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  46. Ben Blumson (2014). Interpreting Images. In Resemblance and Representation. Open Book Publishers. 118-138.
    Just as it’s possible to understand novel sentences without having heard them before, it’s possible to understand novel pictures without having seen them before. But these possibilities are often supposed to have totally different explanations: whereas the ability to understand novel sentences is supposed to be explained by tacit knowledge of a compositional theory of meaning for their language, the ability to understand novel pictures is supposed to be explained differently. In this paper I argue against this disanalogy: insofar as (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  47. Ben Blumson (2014). Depiction and Composition. In Resemblance and Representation. Open Book Publishers. 99-116.
    Traditionally, the structure of a language is revealed by constructing an appropriate theory of meaning for that language, which exhibits how – and whether – the meaning of sentences in the language depends upon the meaning of their parts. In this paper, I argue that whether – and how – what pictures represent depends on what their parts represent should likewise by revealed by the construction of appropriate theories of representation for the symbol system of those pictures. This generalisation, I (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  48. Ben Blumson (2014). Resemblance and Representation. Open Book Publishers.
    It’s a platitude – which only a philosopher would dream of denying – that whereas words are connected to what they represent merely by arbitrary conventions, pictures are connected to what they represent by resemblance. The most important difference between my portrait and my name, for example, is that whereas my portrait and I are connected by my portrait’s resemblance to me, my name and I are connected merely by an arbitrary convention. The first aim of this book is to (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  49. Ben Blumson (2014). Depiction and Intention. In Resemblance and Representation. Open Book Publishers. 51-66.
  50. Ben Blumson (2012). Philosophical Perspectives on Depiction. [REVIEW] Australasian Journal of Philosophy 90 (1):187 - 189.
    Australasian Journal of Philosophy, Volume 90, Issue 1, Page 187-189, March 2012.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
1 — 50 / 490