Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22 (3):376-376 (1999)
Two of the premises of Pylyshyn's target article – surface reconstruction as the goal of early vision and inaccessibility of intermediate stages in the process presumably leading to such reconstruction – are questioned and found wanting.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Is Early Visual Processing Attention Impenetrable?Su-Ling Yeh & I.-Ping Chen - 1999 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22 (3):400-400.
The Cognitive Impenetrability Hypothesis: Doomsday for the Unity of the Cognitive Neurosciences?Birgitta Dresp - 1999 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22 (3):375-376.
Cognitive Impenetrability of Early Vision Does Not Imply Cognitive Impenetrability of Perception.Cathleen M. Moore - 1999 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22 (3):385-386.
A Note on Prediction and Deduction.John Canfield & Keith Lehrer - 1961 - Philosophy of Science 28 (2):204-208.
No Reconstruction, No Impenetrability (at Least Not Much) A Commentary on ``Is Vision Continuous with Cognition?'' by Z. Pylyshyn.Shimon Edelman - unknown
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads12 ( #380,730 of 2,177,979 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #317,206 of 2,177,979 )
How can I increase my downloads?