Determining the primary problem of visual perception: A Gibsonian response to the correlation' objection
David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Philosophical Psychology 5 (1):69-94 (1992)
Fodor & Pylyshyn (1981) criticize J. J. Gibson's ecological account of perception for failing to address what I call the 'correlation problem' in visual perception. That is, they charge that Gibson cannot explain how perceivers learn to correlate detectable properties of the light with perceptible properties of the environment. Furthermore, they identify the correlation problem as a crucial issue for any theory of visual perception, what I call a 'primary problem'—i.e. a problem which plays a definitive role in establishing the concerns of a particular scientific research program. If they are correct, Gibson's failure to resolve this problem would cast considerable doubt upon his ecological approach to perception. In response, I argue that both Fodor & Pylyshyn's problem itself and their proposed inferential solution embody a significant mistake which needs to be eliminated from our thinking about visual perception. As part of my response, I also suggest a Gibsonian alternative to Fodor & Pylyshyn's primary problem formulation
|Keywords||Epistemology Language Perception Truth Visual Gibson, J|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
Daniel C. Dennett (1978). Brainstorms. MIT Press.
Gilbert Ryle (1949/2002). The Concept of Mind. Hutchinson and Co.
Jerry A. Fodor (1975). The Language of Thought. Harvard University Press.
David Marr (1982). Vision. Freeman.
Citations of this work BETA
Harry Heft (1990). Perceiving Affordances in Context: A Reply to Chow. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour 20 (3):277–284.
Similar books and articles
Antti Revonsuo (1998). Visual Perception and Subjective Visual Awareness. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (6):769-770.
Bonnie Tamarkin Paller (1988). A Defense of a Non-Computational, Interactive Model of Visual Observation. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1988:135 - 142.
Jerry A. Fodor & Zenon W. Pylyshyn (1981). How Direct is Visual Perception? Some Reflections on Gibson's 'Ecological Approach'. Cognition 9 (2):139-96.
James J. Gibson (1979). The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception. Houghton Mifflin.
David H. Sanford (1983). The Perception of Shape. In Carl Ginet & Sydney Shoemaker (eds.), Knowledge And Mind: Phil Essays. Oxford University Press
Harry Heft (1989). Affordances and the Body: An Intentional Analysis of Gibson's Ecological Approach to Visual Perception. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour 19 (1):1–30.
Ian Gold (2001). Spatial Location in Color Vision. Consciousness and Cognition 10 (1):59-62.
John Heffner (1976). Some Epistemological Aspects of Recent Work in Visual Perception. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1976:165 - 174.
Thomas Natsoulas (1991). Why Do Things Look as They Do? Some Gibsonian Answers to Koffka's Question. Philosophical Psychology 4 (2):183-202.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads26 ( #142,737 of 1,790,294 )
Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #267,458 of 1,790,294 )
How can I increase my downloads?