Review of Alva Noe, Action in Perception [Book Review]
Journal of Philosophy 102:259-272 (2005)
This is a charming and engaging book that combines careful attention to the phenomenology of experience with an appreciation of the psychology and neuroscience of perception. In some of its aimsfor example, to show problems with a rigid version of a view of visual perception as an inverse optics process of constructing a static 3-D representation from static 2-D information on the retina--it succeeds admirably. As No points out, vision is a process that depends on interactions between the perceiver and the environment and involves contributions from sensory systems other than the eye. He is at pains to note that vision is not passive. His analogy with touch is to the point: touch involves skillful probing and movement, and so does vision, although less obviously and in my view less centrally so. This much is certainly widely accepted among vision scientistsalthough mainstream vision scientists (represented, for example, by Stephen Palmers excellent textbook<sup>2</sup>) view these points as best seen within a version of the inverse optics view that takes inputs as non-static and as including motor instructions (for example, involving eye movements and head movements).<sup>3</sup> The kind of point that No raises is viewed as important at the margins, but as not disturbing the main lines of the picture of vision that descendswith many changesfrom the pioneering work of David Marr in the 1980s (and before him, from Helmholtz). But No shows little interest in mainstream vision science, focusing on non-mainstream ideas in the science of perception, specifically ideas from the anti-representational psychologist J.J. Gibson, and also drawing on Wittgenstein and the phenomenology tradition. There is a sense throughout the book of revolution, of upsetting the applecart. This is a review from the point of view of the applecart.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Are There Unconscious Perceptual Processes?Berit Brogaard - 2011 - Consciousness and Cognition 20 (2):449-63.
Introspection: Divided and Partly Eliminated.Peter Carruthers - 2010 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 80 (1):76-111.
Knowing What We Can Do: Actions, Intentions, and the Construction of Phenomenal Experience.Dave Ward, Tom Roberts & Andy Clark - 2011 - Synthese 181 (3):375-394.
What is This Cognition That is Supposed to Be Embodied?Ken Aizawa - 2015 - Philosophical Psychology 28 (6):755-775.
Similar books and articles
The Epistemological Status of Vision and its Implications for Design.Dhanraj Vishwanath - 2004 - Axiomathes 15 (3):399-486.
The Problems of Consciousness and Content in Theories of Perception.Nini Praetorius - 2007 - Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences 6 (3):349-367.
Descartes' Psychology of Vision and Cognitive Science: The Optics (1637) in the Light of Marr's (1982) Vision.Geir kirkebøen - 1998 - Philosophical Psychology 11 (2):161 – 182.
Beyond the Grand Illusion: What Change Blindness Really Teaches Us About Vision.Alva Noë, Luis Pessoa & Evan Thompson - 2000 - Visual Cognition 7 (1-3):93-106.
Why Visual Experience is Likely to Resist Being Enacted.Pierre Jacob - 2006 - Psyche 12 (1).
Review of Alva Noë's Action in Perception. [REVIEW]Shaun Gallagher - 2005 - Times Literary Supplement.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads220 ( #17,444 of 2,172,874 )
Recent downloads (6 months)7 ( #40,325 of 2,172,874 )
How can I increase my downloads?