Remarks on the geometry of visibles
Philosophical Quarterly 53 (213):581–586 (2003)
| Abstract | An explication is offered of Reid’s claim (discussed recently by Yaffe and others) that the geometry of the visual field is spherical geometry. It is shown that the sphere is the only surface whose geometry coincides, in a certain strong sense, with the geometry of visibles. | |||||||||
| Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Categories | No categories specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Options |
|
|||||||||
| PhilPapers Archive |
Upload a copy of this paper Check publisher's policy on self-archival Papers currently archived: 5,711 |
| External links |
|
| Through your library | Configure |
Giovanni B. Grandi (2005). Thomas Reid's Geometry of Visibles and the Parallel Postulate. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 36 (1):79-103.
R. B. Angell (1974). The Geometry of Visibles. Noûs 8 (2):87-117.
James Van Cleve (2002). Thomas Reid's Geometry of Visibles. Philosophical Review 111 (3):373 - 416.
James Van Cleve (2002). Thomas Reid's Geometry of Visibles. Philosophical Review 111 (3):373-416.
Gideon Yaffe (2002). Reconsidering Reid's Geometry of Visibles. Philosophical Quarterly 52 (209):602-620.
Amit Hagar (2002). Thomas Reid and Non-Euclidean Geometry. Reid Studies 5 (2):54-64.
E. Slowik (2003). Conventionalism in Reid's 'Geometry of Visibles'. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 34 (3):467-489.
Norman Daniels (1972). Thomas Reid's Discovery of a Non-Euclidean Geometry. Philosophy of Science 39 (2):219-234.
Norman Daniels (1974). Thomas Reid's Inquiry: The Geometry of Visibles and the Case for Realism. New York,B. Franklin.
Phillip John Meadows (2011). Contemporary Arguments for a Geometry of Visual Experience. European Journal of Philosophy 19 (3):408-430.
Monthly downloads |
Added to index2009-01-28Total downloads27 ( #45,878 of 551,105 )Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #63,341 of 551,105 )How can I increase my downloads? |

