David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
I-Perception 3 (3):186-188 (2012)
How do we recognize identities between seen shapes and felt ones? Is this due to associative learning, or to intrinsic connections these sensory modalities? We can address this question by testing the capacities of newly sighted subjects to match seen and felt shapes, but only if it is shown that the subjects can see the objects well enough to form adequate visual representations of their shapes. In light of this, a recent study by R. Held and colleagues fails to demonstrate that their newly sighted subjects’ inability to match seen and felt shape was due to a lack of intermodal connections rather than a purely visual deficit, as they may not have been able visually to represent 3D shape in the perspective-invariant way required for intermodal matching. However, the study could be modified in any of several ways to help avoid this problem.
|Keywords||Molyneux problem Molyneux's question visual perception haptic perception spatial perception intermodal perception empiricism|
|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
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
John Schwenkler (2013). Do Things Look the Way They Feel? Analysis 73 (1):86-96.
David H. Sanford (1983). The Perception of Shape. In Carl Ginet & Sydney Shoemaker (eds.), Knowledge And Mind: Phil Essays. Oxford University Press.
Brian R. Glenney (2013). Philosophical Problems, Cluster Concepts, and the Many Lives of Molyneux's Question. Biology and Philosophy 28 (3):541-558.
Kirk A. Ludwig (1996). Shape Properties and Perception. In Enrique Villanueva (ed.), Philosophical Issues. Atascadero: Ridgeview. 325-350.
Edouard Gentaz & Yves Rossetti (1999). Is Haptic Perception Continuous with Cognition? Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22 (3):378-379.
Yunfeng Li & Zygmunt Pizlo (2011). Depth Cues Versus the Simplicity Principle in 3D Shape Perception. Topics in Cognitive Science 3 (4):667-685.
Robert Hopkins (2005). Thomas Reid on Molyneux's Question. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 86 (3):340-364.
Susanna Schellenberg (2006). Perception in Perspective. Dissertation,
Mike Bruno & Eric Mandelbaum (2010). Locke's Answer to Molyneux's Thought Experiment. History of Philosophy Quarterly 27 (2):165-80.
Brian Glenney (2012). Leibniz on Molyneux's Question. History of Philosophy Quarterly 29 (3):247-264.
Susanne Ferber & Stephen M. Emrich (2007). Maintaining the Ties That Bind: The Role of an Intermediate Visual Memory Store in the Persistence of Awareness. Cognitive Neuropsychology 24 (2):187-210.
Bruno G. Breitmeyer & Haluk Ögmen (2006). Visual Masking Reveals Differences Between the Nonconscious and Conscious Processing of Form and Surface Attributes. In Haluk Ögmen & Bruno G. Breitmeyer (eds.), The First Half Second: The Microgenesis and Temporal Dynamics of Unconscious and Conscious Visual Processes. Mit Press. 315-333.
John Campbell (2007). What's the Role of Spatial Awareness in Visual Perception of Objects? Mind and Language 22 (5):548–562.
Gordon C. Baylis, Christopher L. Gore, P. Dennis Rodriguez & Rebecca J. Shisler (2001). Visual Extinction and Awareness: The Importance of Binding Dorsal and Ventral Pathways. Visual Cognition. Special Issue 8 (3):359-379.
Added to index2012-04-11
Total downloads28 ( #71,746 of 1,410,004 )
Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #75,642 of 1,410,004 )
How can I increase my downloads?