`That small and unsensible shape': Visual Representations of the Euclidean Point in Sixteenth-Century Print
Graduate studies at Western
Spontaneous Generations 6 (1):148-159 (2012)
|Abstract||This paper probes the foundations and limits of visual representation in the sciences through a close reading of the diagrams that accompanied definitions of the geometric point in the first century of printed editions of Euclid’s Elements. I begin with the modal form for such diagrams of Euclid’s “small and unsensible shape,” showing how it incorporates a broad spectrum of conventions and practices related to the point’s philosophical and practical roles in the surrounding Euclidean geometry. I then explore the form’s several variations in order to consider the role of “mere representation” in geometric exegesis, and conclude by characterizing the curious relationship between things and their images and that relationship’s implications for understanding scientific knowledge and practice|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Manish Singh & Barbara Landau (1998). Parts of Visual Shape as Primitives for Categorization. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (1):36-37.
David H. Sanford (1983). The Perception of Shape. In Carl Ginet & Sydney Shoemaker (eds.), Knowledge And Mind: Phil Essays. Oxford University Press.
Peter Barker & Bernard R. Goldstein (1998). Realism and Instrumentalism in Sixteenth Century Astronomy: A Reappraisal. Perspectives on Science 6 (3):232-258.
Jennifer D. Ryan & Neal J. Cohen (2001). The Existence of Internal Visual Memory Representations. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 24 (5):1002-1003.
Glyn W. Humphreys (2003). Conscious Visual Representations Built From Multiple Binding Processes: Evidence From Neuropsychology. In Axel Cleeremans (ed.), The Unity of Consciousness. Oxford University Press.
Stevan Harnad (2005). To Cognize is to Categorize: Cognition is Categorization. In C. Lefebvre & H. Cohen (eds.), Handbook of Categorization. Elsevier.
Elizabeth Spelke, Sang Ah Lee & Véronique Izard (2010). Beyond Core Knowledge: Natural Geometry. Cognitive Science 34 (5):863-884.
Rodney G. Downey & Asher M. Kach (2010). Euclidean Functions of Computable Euclidean Domains. Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 52 (2):163-172.
Charles Siewert (2006). Is the Appearance of Shape Protean? Psyche 12 (3):1-16.
John Schwenkler (2012). On the Matching of Seen and Felt Shape by Newly Sighted Subjects. I-Perception 3 (3):186-188.
Bruno G. Breitmeyer, Haluk Ogmen, Jose Ramon & Jian Chen (2005). Unconscious and Conscious Priming by Forms and Their Parts. Visual Cognition 12 (5):720-736.
D. J. Bennett (2012). Seeing Shape: Shape Appearances and Shape Constancy. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 63 (3):487-518.
Norman Daniels (1972). Thomas Reid's Discovery of a Non-Euclidean Geometry. Philosophy of Science 39 (2):219-234.
Shimon Edelman & Nathan Intrator (2003). Towards Structural Systematicity in Distributed, Statically Bound Visual Representations. Cognitive Science 23 (1):73-110.
Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
Added to index2012-10-04
Total downloads1 ( #292,723 of 738,450 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,778 of 738,450 )
How can I increase my downloads?