David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Visual space can be distinguished from physical space. The ﬁrst is found in visual experience, while the second is deﬁned independently of perception. Theorists have wondered about the relation between the two. Some investigators have concluded that visual space is non- Euclidean, and that it does not have a single metric structure. Here it is argued (1) that visual space exhibits contraction in all three dimensions with increasing distance from the observer, (2) that experienced features of this contraction (including the apparent convergence of lines in visual experience that are produced from physically parallel stimuli in ordinary viewing conditions) are not the same as would be the experience of a perspective projection onto a frontoparallel plane, and (3) that such contraction is consistent with size constancy. These properties of visual space are diﬀerent from those that would be predicted if spatial perception resulted from the successful solution of the inverse problem. They are consistent with the notion that optical constraints have been internalized. More generally, they are also consistent with the notion that visual spatial structures bear a resemblance relation to physical spatial structures. This notion supports a type of representational relation that is distinct from mere causal correspondence. The reticence of some philosophers and psychologists to discuss the structure of phenomenal space is diagnosed in terms of the simple materialism and the functionalism of the 1970s and 1980s. Ó 2003 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
|Through your library||Only published papers are available at libraries|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Gary Hatfield (2003). Representation and Constraints: The Inverse Problem and the Structure of Visual Space. Acta Psychologica 114:355-378.
Farid Masrour (forthcoming). The Geometry of Visual Space and the Nature of Visual Experience. Philosophical Studies.
Ian Gold (2001). Spatial Location in Color Vision. Consciousness and Cognition 10 (1):59-62.
John Schwenkler (2012). Does Visual Spatial Awareness Require the Visual Awareness of Space? Mind and Language 27 (3):308-329.
Robert Briscoe (2009). Egocentric Spatial Representation in Action and Perception. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 79 (2):423 - 460.
Dhanraj Vishwanath (2005). The Epistemological Status of Vision and its Implications for Design. Axiomathes 15 (3):399-486.
Romi Nijhawan & Beena Khurana (2002). Motion, Space, and Mental Imagery. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 25 (2):203-204.
David Ingle (2002). Problems with a “Cortical Screen” for Visual Imagery. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 25 (2):195-196.
John J. Drummond (1979). On Seeing a Material Thing in Space: The Role of Kinaesthesis in Visual Perception. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 40 (September):19-32.
R. W. Kentridge, L. H. de-Wit & C. A. Heywood (2008). What is Attended in Spatial Attention? Journal of Consciousness Studies 15 (4):105-111.
John Louis Schwenkler (2009). Space and Self-Awareness. Dissertation, University of California, Berkeley
Louise Richardson (2010). Seeing Empty Space. European Journal of Philosophy 18 (2):227-243.
L. Wiesenthal (1983). Visual Space From the Perspective of Possible-Worlds Semantics, I. Synthese 56 (August):199-238.
Added to index2010-12-22
Total downloads9 ( #128,813 of 1,088,396 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #42,750 of 1,088,396 )
How can I increase my downloads?