Why, as responsible for figurativity, seeing-in can only be inflected seeing-in

Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences 14 (3):651-667 (2015)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

In this paper, I want to argue for two main and related points. First, I want to defend Richard Wollheim’s well-known thesis that the twofold mental state of seeing-in is the distinctive pictorial experience that marks figurativity. Figurativity is what makes a representation pictorial, a depiction of its subject. Moreover, I want to show that insofar as it is a mark of figurativity, all seeing-in is inflected. That is to say, every mental state of seeing-in is such that the characterisation of the properties by which a certain subject is seen in a given picture as having refers to the design properties of the picture’s vehicle, i.e., to the visible surface properties of that vehicle that are responsible for the fact that one such subject is seen in it, precisely taken in such a design role. Finally, I will try to show that seeing-in is qualified by inflection independently of whether it is conscious or unconscious seeing-in

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,164

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

Inflected and uninflected perception of pictures.Bence Nanay - 2010 - In Catharine Abell & Katerina Bantinaki (eds.), Philosophical Perspectives on Depiction. Oxford University Press.
Inflected Pictorial Experience: Its Treatment and Significance.Robert Hopkins - 2010 - In Catharine Abell & Katerina Bantinaki (eds.), Philosophical Perspectives on Depiction. Oxford University Press. pp. 151.
Why the pictorial relation is not reference.Alon Chasid - 2004 - British Journal of Aesthetics 44 (3):226-247.
Structure, Intention and Representation.Göran Hermeren - 1977 - Grazer Philosophische Studien 3 (1):89-106.
Hallucinatory Pictures.Roberto Casati - 2010 - Acta Analytica 25 (3):365-368.
Internal and external pictures.Catherine Abell & Gregory Currie - 1999 - Philosophical Psychology 12 (4):429-445.
Touching pictures.Robert Hopkins - 2000 - British Journal of Aesthetics 40 (1):149-167.
Perceiving pictures.Bence Nanay - 2011 - Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences 10 (4):461-480.
Pictures, pictorial contents and vision.Dominic Gregory - 2010 - British Journal of Aesthetics 50 (1):15-32.
Understanding pictures.Dominic Lopes - 1996 - New York: Oxford University Press.
Is twofoldness necessary for representational seeing?Bence Nanay - 2005 - British Journal of Aesthetics 45 (3):248-257.

Analytics

Added to PP
2013-08-29

Downloads
68 (#229,656)

6 months
8 (#274,950)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Alberto Voltolini
University of Turin

Citations of this work

Visual Feeling of Presence.Gabriele Ferretti - 2018 - Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 99 (S1):112-136.
The Neural Dynamics of Seeing-In.Gabriele Ferretti - 2019 - Erkenntnis 84 (6):1285-1324.
The Neural Dynamics of Seeing-In.Gabriele Ferretti - 2019 - Erkenntnis 84 (6):1285-1324.
Are Pictures Peculiar Objects of Perception?Gabriele Ferretti - 2017 - Journal of the American Philosophical Association 3 (3):372-393.

View all 16 citations / Add more citations

References found in this work

Philosophical Investigations.Ludwig Wittgenstein - 1953 - New York, NY, USA: Wiley-Blackwell. Edited by G. E. M. Anscombe.
Understanding pictures.Dominic Lopes - 1996 - New York: Oxford University Press.
Why visual attention and awareness are different.Victor A. F. Lamme - 2003 - Trends in Cognitive Sciences 7 (1):12-18.
Painting as an Art.Richard Wollheim - 1987 - Princeton University Press.

View all 30 references / Add more references