Publications-Periodical Articles

Article View/Open

Publication Export

Google ScholarTM

NCCU Library

Citation Infomation

  • Loading...
    Loading...

Related Publications in TAIR

TitleObstacles to Testing Molyneux’s Question Empirically
Creator鄭會穎
Cheng, Tony
Contributor哲學系
Key WordsMolyneux question ;  blind subjects ;  movement ; raised-line drawings ;  amodal representation ;  touch
Date2015-08
Date Issued26-May-2020 13:39:21 (UTC+8)
SummaryThere have recently been various empirical attempts to answer Molyneux’s question, for example, the experiments undertaken by the Held group. These studies, though intricate, have encountered some objections, for instance, from Schwenkler, who proposes two ways of improving the experiments. One is “to re-run [the] experiment with the stimulus objects made to move, and/or the subjects moved or permitted to move with respect to them” (p. 94), which would promote three dimensional or otherwise viewpoint-invariant representations. The other is “to use geometrically simpler shapes, such as the cube and sphere in Molyneux’s original proposal, or planar figures instead of three-dimensional solids” (p. 188). Connolly argues against the first modification but agrees with the second. In this article, I argue that the second modification is also problematic (though still surmountable), and that both Schwenkler and Connolly are too optimistic about the prospect of addressing Molyneux’s question empirically.
Relationi-Perception, Vol.6, No.4, pp.1-5
Typearticle
DOI https://doi.org/10.1177/2041669515599330
dc.contributor 哲學系
dc.creator (作者) 鄭會穎
dc.creator (作者) Cheng, Tony
dc.date (日期) 2015-08
dc.date.accessioned 26-May-2020 13:39:21 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.available 26-May-2020 13:39:21 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 26-May-2020 13:39:21 (UTC+8)-
dc.identifier.uri (URI) http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/129855-
dc.description.abstract (摘要) There have recently been various empirical attempts to answer Molyneux’s question, for example, the experiments undertaken by the Held group. These studies, though intricate, have encountered some objections, for instance, from Schwenkler, who proposes two ways of improving the experiments. One is “to re-run [the] experiment with the stimulus objects made to move, and/or the subjects moved or permitted to move with respect to them” (p. 94), which would promote three dimensional or otherwise viewpoint-invariant representations. The other is “to use geometrically simpler shapes, such as the cube and sphere in Molyneux’s original proposal, or planar figures instead of three-dimensional solids” (p. 188). Connolly argues against the first modification but agrees with the second. In this article, I argue that the second modification is also problematic (though still surmountable), and that both Schwenkler and Connolly are too optimistic about the prospect of addressing Molyneux’s question empirically.
dc.format.extent 127860 bytes-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.relation (關聯) i-Perception, Vol.6, No.4, pp.1-5
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Molyneux question ;  blind subjects ;  movement ; raised-line drawings ;  amodal representation ;  touch
dc.title (題名) Obstacles to Testing Molyneux’s Question Empirically
dc.type (資料類型) article
dc.identifier.doi (DOI) 10.1177/2041669515599330
dc.doi.uri (DOI) https://doi.org/10.1177/2041669515599330