Graduate studies at Western
Philosophical Psychology 9 (1):81-91 (1996)
|Abstract||Recently it has been argued that a model of directed perception provides an alternative to both indirect and direct accounts of the nature of vision. An examination of this proposal serves as a basis for challenging the meaningfulness and empirical import of the theoretical and ontological differences said to separate these models. Although focusing on James Cutting's work, the analysis is meant to speak more generally to the supposed significance of the distinctions among indirect, direct, and directed theories of perception|
|Keywords||Analysis Direction Perception Science Vision Cutting, J|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Irving Thalberg (1973). Ingredients of Perception. Analysis 33 (April):145-155.
Malcolm M. Moncrieff (1951). The Clairvoyant Theory Of Perception: A New Theory Of Vision. London,: Faber.
Rebecca Copenhaver (2010). Thomas Reid on Acquired Perception. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 91 (3):285-312.
Matthew Ratcliffe (2008). Touch and Situatedness. International Journal of Philosophical Studies 16 (3):299 – 322.
Gerald Vision (1997). Problems of Vision: Rethinking the Causal Theory of Perception. New York: Oxford University Press.
Todd Buras (2008). Three Grades of Immediate Perception: Thomas Reid's Distinctions. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 76 (3):603–632.
Robert Schwartz (ed.) (2004). Perception. Malden MA: Blackwell Publishing.
Cathleen M. Moore (1999). Cognitive Impenetrability of Early Vision Does Not Imply Cognitive Impenetrability of Perception. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22 (3):385-386.
Casey O'Callaghan (2008). Object Perception: Vision and Audition. Philosophy Compass 3 (4):803-829.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads11 ( #107,531 of 739,463 )
Recent downloads (6 months)0
How can I increase my downloads?