David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Philosophical Psychology 19 (2):129-149 (2006)
This paper examines the status of unattended visual stimuli in the light of recent work on the role of attention in visual perception. Although the question of whether attention is required for visual experience seems very interesting, this paper argues that there currently is no good reason to take a stand on the issue. Moreover, it is argued that much of the allure of that question stems from a continued attachment to the defective ‘inner picture view’ of experience and a mistaken notion that the ultimate goal of vision is to produce visual experience. The paper considers a promising general account of the content and structure of vision and presents reasons for not taking that account to be committed to any substantive claims about the experiential status of unattended visual stimuli. Also addressed are the active nature of vision and the role of vision in enabling our ecological success. These considerations highlight that visual experience is not the whole of vision and that a much more important question about unattended visual stimuli than whether they are consciously experienced is what contribution they make to how we interact with the world.
|Keywords||Action Attention Blindness Content Epistemology Vision|
|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
Gerd Gigerenzer (1999). Simple Heuristics That Make Us Smart. Oxford University Press.
A. David Milner & Melvyn A. Goodale (1995). The Visual Brain in Action. Oxford University Press.
Citations of this work BETA
Luigi Burigana & Michele Vicovaro (2015). Modules in Spatial Vision: Intrinsic Reasons of Their Functional Attributes. Philosophical Psychology 29 (2):250-260.
Elizabeth Irvine (2010). How Alternative is the Alternative? International Journal of Machine Consciousness 2 (1):41-44.
Similar books and articles
Robert A. Wilson (2010). Extended Vision. In Nivedita Gangopadhyay, Michael Madary & Finn Spicer (eds.), Perception, Action and Consciousness. Oxford University Press.
Ronald A. Rensink (2000). Seeing, Sensing, and Scrutinizing. Vision Research:469-1487.
Luiz Pessoa (2005). To What Extent Are Emotional Visual Stimuli Processed Without Attention and Awareness? Current Opinion in Neurobiology 15 (2):188-196.
Wayne Wu (2008). Visual Attention, Conceptual Content, and Doing It Right. Mind 117 (468):1003-1033.
Zenon W. Pylyshyn (2001). Seeing, Acting, and Knowing. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 24 (5):999-999.
Paul Coates (2004). Wilfrid Sellars, Perceptual Consciousness, and Theory of Attention. Essays in Philosophy 5 (1):1-25.
Daniel T. Levin, Sarah B. Drivdahl, Nausheen Momen & Melissa R. Beck (2002). False Predictions About the Detectability of Visual Changes: The Role of Beliefs About Attention, Memory, and the Continuity of Attended Objects in Causing Change Blindness Blindness. Consciousness and Cognition 11 (4):507-527.
Naomi M. Eilan (2006). On the Role of Perceptual Consciousness in Explaining the Goals and Mechanisms of Vision: A Convergence on Attention? Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume 80 (1):67-88.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads71 ( #58,248 of 1,793,090 )
Recent downloads (6 months)13 ( #59,611 of 1,793,090 )
How can I increase my downloads?