- New
-
Topics
- All Categories
- Metaphysics and Epistemology
- Value Theory
- Science, Logic, and Mathematics
- Science, Logic, and Mathematics
- Logic and Philosophy of Logic
- Philosophy of Biology
- Philosophy of Cognitive Science
- Philosophy of Computing and Information
- Philosophy of Mathematics
- Philosophy of Physical Science
- Philosophy of Social Science
- Philosophy of Probability
- General Philosophy of Science
- Philosophy of Science, Misc
- History of Western Philosophy
- Philosophical Traditions
- Philosophy, Misc
- Other Academic Areas
- Journals
- Submit material
- More
Incommensurability and the "omission" in Gibson's theory: A second reply to Heil
Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour 12 (3):345–347 (1982)
Abstract
This article has no associated abstract. (fix it)Author's Profile
My notes
Similar books and articles
What Gibson isn't missing after all: A reply to Heil.Stephen Wilcox & Stuart Katz - 1981 - Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour 11 (3):313–317.
Gibsonian sins of omission.John Heil - 1981 - Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour 11 (3):307–311.
Alternative perspectives on omission bias.Christopher J. Anderson - 2005 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 28 (4):544-544.
Perception and cognition: A final reply to Heil.Edward S. Reed & Rebecca K. Jones - 1982 - Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour 12 (2):223–224.
Can Heil's ontological conception accommodate complex properties?Vera Hoffmann - 2006 - In Michael Esfeld (ed.), John Heil. Symposium on his Ontological Point of View. ontos verlag.
Taxonomic incommensurability.Howard Sankey - 1998 - International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 12 (1):7 – 16.
What Heil is missing in Gibson: A reply.Harry Heft - 1980 - Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour 10 (3):187–193.
Analytics
Added to PP
2009-01-28
Downloads
11 (#1,117,383)
6 months
2 (#1,229,212)
2009-01-28
Downloads
11 (#1,117,383)
6 months
2 (#1,229,212)
Historical graph of downloads
Author's Profile
Citations of this work
Affordances and the body: An intentional analysis of Gibson's ecological approach to visual perception.Harry Heft - 1989 - Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour 19 (1):1–30.
Perceiving affordances in context: A reply to Chow.Harry Heft - 1990 - Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour 20 (3):277–284.
References found in this work
The Senses Considered as Perceptual Systems.James Jerome Gibson - 1966 - Boston, USA: Houghton Mifflin.
Gibson's theory of perception: A case of hasty epistemologizing?Edward S. Reed & Rebecca K. Jones - 1978 - Philosophy of Science 45 (4):519-530.
Is perception blind?Edward S. Reed & Rebecca K. Jones - 1981 - Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour 11 (1):87–91.
What Heil is missing in Gibson: A reply.Harry Heft - 1980 - Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour 10 (3):187–193.
PhilPapers logo by Andrea Andrews and Meghan Driscoll.
This site uses cookies and Google Analytics (see our terms & conditions for details regarding the privacy implications). Use of this site is subject to terms & conditions.
All rights reserved by The PhilPapers Foundation
Server: philpapers-web-7c76586df8-ms9hf uwo