Seeing and retinal stability: On a sensorimotor argument for the necessity of eye movement for sight

Philosophical Psychology 26 (2):263 - 266 (2013)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Sensorimotor theorists of perception have argued that eye movement is a necessary condition for seeing on the basis that subjects whose retinal images do not move undergo a form of blindness. I show that the argument does not work.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,386

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

The eye-movement engine.Wayne S. Murray - 2003 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 26 (4):494-495.
Another variety of vision.John R. Skoyles - 1997 - Trends in Neurosciences 20 (1):22-23.
Understanding 'sensorimotor understanding'.Tom Roberts - 2010 - Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences 9 (1):101-111.
Representation is space-variant.Giorgio Bonmassar & Eric L. Schwartz - 1998 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (4):469-470.
A sensorimotor account of vision and visual consciousness.J. Kevin O’Regan & Alva Noë - 2001 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 24 (5):883-917.
Change blindness.J. Kevin O'Regan - 2003 - In L. Nadel (ed.), Encyclopedia of Cognitive Science. Nature Publishing Group.
On the variety of “deictic codes”.Boris M. Velichkovsky - 1997 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 20 (4):757-757.

Analytics

Added to PP
2011-11-18

Downloads
73 (#221,304)

6 months
7 (#411,886)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Dan Cavedon-Taylor
Open University (UK)

References found in this work

Action in Perception.Alva Noë - 2004 - MIT Press.
Perceptual content and sensorimotor expectations.Dan Cavedon-Taylor - 2011 - Philosophical Quarterly 61 (243):383-391.

Add more references