Behavioral and Brain Sciences 25 (2):202-203 (2002)
|Abstract||Students of geometry do not prove Euclid's first theorem by examining an accompanying diagram, or by visualizing the construction of a figure. The original proof of Euclid's first theorem is incomplete, and this gap in logic is undetected by visual imagination. While cognition involves truth values, vision does not: the notions of inference and proof are foreign to vision.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
David Ingle (2002). Problems with a “Cortical Screen” for Visual Imagery. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 25 (2):195-196.
E. T. Whittaker (1949/1979). From Euclid to Eddington: A Study of Conceptions of the External World. Ams Press.
Cameron Shelley (1996). Visual Abductive Reasoning in Archaeology. Philosophy of Science 63 (2):278-301.
Qasim Zaidi & A. Fuzz Griffiths (2002). Generic Assumptions Shared by Visual Perception and Imagery. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 25 (2):215-216.
Georg Goldenberg (2002). Loss of Visual Imagery: Neuropsychological Evidence in Search for a Theory. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 25 (2):191-191.
John Mumma (2012). Constructive Geometrical Reasoning and Diagrams. Synthese 186 (1):103-119.
Martha E. Arterberry, Catherine Craver-Lemley & Adam Reeves (2002). Visual Imagery is Not Always Like Visual Perception. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 25 (2):183-184.
John Mumma (2010). Proofs, Pictures, and Euclid. Synthese 175 (2):255 - 287.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads11 ( #107,366 of 722,787 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #60,541 of 722,787 )
How can I increase my downloads?