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.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive

    This entry is not archived by us. If you are the author and have permission from the publisher, we recommend that you archive it. Many publishers automatically grant permission to authors to archive pre-prints. By uploading a copy of your work, you will enable us to better index it, making it easier to find.

    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 103,024

External links

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

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2011-11-18

Downloads
85 (#253,951)

6 months
4 (#868,069)

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