No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
A Psychological Look at Some Problems of Perception
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 08 January 2010
Extract
I shall attempt something rash in this paper. I shall draw your attention to some past and current work on perception by psychologists and others. I shall concentrate on work in vision and hearing. This outline will occupy the first part of my lecture. I shall then go on, in the second part, to suggest that this scientific work has certain philosophical implications. This whole attempt is a bit rash for obvious reasons. It is not easy to outline fairly and accurately past and current work in any branch of science. I am very liable, therefore, to do an injustice to the efforts of psychologists and others in this field. What makes matters more difficult for me is that I also have to show that this work is of philosophical interest. What has led me to embark on this perilous enterprise is a hunch I have developed in recent years. I have the hunch that philosophers who are interested in perception would do well to pay rather more attention than (perhaps) they have been wont to do in the past to the work and discourse coming out of the scientific laboratory and similar places.
- Type
- Papers
- Information
- Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplements , Volume 3: Knowledge and Necessity , March 1969 , pp. 51 - 72
- Copyright
- Copyright © The Royal Institute of Philosophy and the contributors 1969
References
page 51 note 1 I am indebted to Messrs. N. K. Humphrey and P. E. Bryant, and to Mrs Anne Treisman for their help in the preparation of the first part of this chapter.
page 52 note 1 Hubel, D. H. and Wiesel, T. N., J. Physiol. (1962) 160.Google Scholar
page 55 note 1 Salapatek, P. and Kessen, W., ‘Visual Scanning of Triangles by the human newborn’, J. Exp. Child Psychol. (1966) 155–67Google Scholar; Bower, T. G. R., ‘The Visual World of Infants’, Scientific American, ccxv (1966) 80CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Fantz, R. L., ‘The Origin of Form Perception’, Scientific American, ccrv (1961) 66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
page 56 note 1 Lashley, K. S., J. Gen. Psychol. (1938) 18, 123.Google Scholar
page 56 note 2 Humphrey, N. K., Personal Communication.Google Scholar
page 59 note 1 Treisman, M., J. Acoust. Soc. Amer., xxxv 8 (1963) 1256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
page 60 note 1 Broadbent, D. E., Psychol. Rev., LXXIV 1 (1967) 1CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Broadbent, D. E. and Gregory, M., Nature, ccxv (1967) 58.Google Scholar
page 62 note 1 Oldfield, R. G. and Wingfield, A., Quart. J. Expt. Psychol., XVII(4) (1965) 273CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Wingfield, A., ‘Identification and Naming of Objects’ (D.Phil, thesis, Oxford Univ.).Google Scholar
page 63 note 1 Humphrey, N. K., ‘Two studies in the neuropsychology of vision’ (Ph.D. thesis, Cambridge Univ.).Google Scholar
page 63 note 2 Riddoch, G., Brain, XL (1917) 15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
page 64 note 1 Quinton, A. M., Mind, LXIV 253 (1955).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
page 68 note 1 Woozley, A. D., Theory of Knowledge (London, 1949).Google Scholar
page 68 note 2 Willard, D., ‘A Crucial Error in Epistemology’, Mind, LXXVI (1967).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
page 70 note 1 Locke, D., ‘Perceiving and Thinking’, Proc. Arist. Soc, suppl. vol. XLII (1968).Google Scholar