Behavioral and Brain Sciences 26 (4):411-412 (2003)
|Abstract||This new heuristic model of perceptual analysis raises interesting issues but in the end falls short. Its arguments are more in the Cartesian than Gestalt tradition. Much of the argument is based on setting up theoretical straw men and ignores well known perceptual and brain science. Arguments are reviewed in light of known physiology and traditional Gestalt theory.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Steven Lehar (2003). Gestalt Isomorphism and the Primacy of Subjective Conscious Experience: A Gestalt Bubble Model. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 26 (4):357-408.
Xiang Chen (2001). Perceptual Symbols and Taxonomy Comparison. Philosophy of Science 3 (September):S200-S212.
F. Lowenthal (1999). Can Handicapped Subjects Use Perceptual Symbol Systems? Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22 (4):625-626.
Jerry A. Fodor (1988). A Reply to Churchland's `Perceptual Plasticity and Theoretical Neutrality'. Philosophy of Science 55 (June):188-98.
Tyler Burge (2005). Disjunctivism and Perceptual Psychology. Philosophical Topics 33 (1):1-78.
David Hilbert (1994). Is Seeing Believing? PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1994:446 - 453.
Jennifer A. McMahon (2003). Perceptual Constraints and Perceptual Schemata:The Possibility of Perceptual Style. Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 61 (3):259–273.
James L. Dannemiller & William Epstein (1999). Constraining the Use of Constraints. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22 (3):373-374.
Slobodan Markovic (2003). The Soap Bubble: Phenomenal State or Perceptual System Dynamics? Behavioral and Brain Sciences 26 (4):420-421.
Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
Added to index2009-01-28
Recent downloads (6 months)0
How can I increase my downloads?