Axiomathes 13 (3-4):329-346 (2003)

What is the relation between Kanizsa's bias towards convexity and the Gestaltists' demonstrations that perceptual organization obeys a principle of pragnänz, or simplicity? Why should either kind of bias exist? Textbook accounts assign no functional role for these biases. Geon theory (Biederman 1987) proposes that we can understand these biases in terms of fundamental processes by which complex objects are decomposed into convex (or singly concave) regions at points of matched cusps according to the transversality regularity (Hoffman and Richards 1985). Such decomposition yields simple, convex parts segmented between the concavities. A shape that contains concavities is generally regarded as complex insofar as it can be decomposed into the regions, or parts, between the concavities. It is these simple parts that are the stable elements of shape, not the whole object. In fact, geon theory leads to the expectation that shape recognition proceeds most efficiently when the parts are good (in the pragnänz sense) but the object is bad!
Keywords Philosophy   Philosophy   Logic   Ontology   Linguistics   Cognitive Psychology
Categories (categorize this paper)
Reprint years 2004
DOI 10.1023/B:AXIO.0000007318.67978.1c
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 63,319
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Parts of Recognition.D. D. Hoffman & W. A. Richards - 1984 - Cognition 18 (1-3):65-96.

View all 6 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles


Added to PP index

Total views
36 ( #299,940 of 2,448,683 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #447,034 of 2,448,683 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes