David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
European Journal of Philosophy 19 (3):408-430 (2011)
Abstract: In this paper I consider recent attempts to establish that the geometry of visual experience is a spherical geometry. These attempts, offered by Gideon Yaffe, James van Cleve and Gordon Belot, follow Thomas Reid in arguing for an equivalency of a geometry of ‘visibles’ and spherical geometry. I argue that although the proposed equivalency is successfully established by the strongest form of the argument, this does not warrant any conclusion about the geometry of visual experience. I argue, firstly, that the resistance of this contemporary argument to empirical considerations counts against its plausibility. Moreover, I argue that the contemporary approach provides no compelling reason for supposing that the geometry offered as the geometry of ‘visibles’ is the correct geometrical description of visual experience.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|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
Thomas Reid & Derek R. Brookes (1997). An Inquiry Into the Human Mind on the Principles of Common Sense : A Critical Edition. Monograph Collection (Matt - Pseudo).
Rebecca Copenhaver (2004). A Realism for Reid: Mediated but Direct. British Journal for the History of Philosophy 12 (1):61 – 74.
Patrick A. Heelan (1983). Space-Perception And The Philosophy Of Science. University Of California Press.
P. F. Strawson (1975). The Bounds of Sense: An Essay on Kant's Critique of Pure Reason. Distributed by Harper & Row, Barnes & Noble Import Division.
Jim Hopkins (1973). Visual Geometry. Philosophical Review 82 (1):3-34.
Citations of this work BETA
Similar books and articles
Farid Masrour (2015). The Geometry of Visual Space and the Nature of Visual Experience. Philosophical Studies 172 (7):1813-1832.
René Jagnow (2006). Edmund Husserl on the Applicability of Formal Geometry. In Emily Carson & Renate Huber (eds.), Intuition and the Axiomatic Method. Springer 67--85.
Robert French (1987). The Geometry of Visual Space. Noûs 21 (June):115-133.
Amit Hagar (2002). Thomas Reid and Non-Euclidean Geometry. Reid Studies 5 (2):54-64.
Rene Jagnow (2003). Geometry and Spatial Intuition: A Genetic Approach. Dissertation, Mcgill University (Canada)
Gideon Yaffe (2002). Reconsidering Reid's Geometry of Visibles. Philosophical Quarterly 52 (209):602-620.
Norman Daniels (1974). Thomas Reid's Inquiry: The Geometry of Visibles and the Case for Realism. New York,B. Franklin.
Norman Daniels (1972). Thomas Reid's Discovery of a Non-Euclidean Geometry. Philosophy of Science 39 (2):219-234.
E. Slowik (2003). Conventionalism in Reid's 'Geometry of Visibles'. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 34 (3):467-489.
Gordon Belot (2003). Remarks on the Geometry of Visibles. Philosophical Quarterly 53 (213):581–586.
Added to index2009-10-22
Total downloads46 ( #73,108 of 1,725,873 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #268,271 of 1,725,873 )
How can I increase my downloads?