Perception and Illusion: Historical Perspectives

257 Pages·2005·1.34 MB·English

by  Nicholas J. Wade (auth.)

Perception and Illusion
Historical Perspectives
Library of the History of
Psychological Theories
SeriesEditor:RobertW.Rieber,CityUniversityofNewYork,NewYork,NY
PERCEPTIONANDILLUSION
HistoricalPerspectives
NicholasJ.Wade
AcontinuationOrderPlanisavailableforthisseries.Acontinuationorderwillbringdelivery
ofeachnewvolumeimmediatelyuponpublication.Volumesarebilledonlyuponactual
shipment.Forfurtherinformationpleasecontactthepublisher.
Perception and Illusion
Historical Perspectives
Nicholas J. Wade
UniversityofDundee
Dundee,UnitedKingdom
Springer
eBookISBN: 0-387-22723-7
Print ISBN: 0-387-22722-9
©2005 Springer Science + Business Media, Inc.
Print ©2005Springer Science + Business Media, Inc.
Dordrecht
All rights reserved
No part of this eBook maybe reproducedor transmitted inanyform or byanymeans,electronic,
mechanical, recording, or otherwise, without written consent from the Publisher
Created in the United States of America
Visit Springer's eBookstore at: http://ebooks.kluweronline.com
and the Springer Global Website Online at: http://www.springeronline.com
ToDaisyandSam
Preface
Ourcontactwiththeworldisthroughperception,andthereforethestudy
of the process is of obvious importance and significance. For much of
its long history, the study of perception has been confined to naturalis-
tic observation. Nonetheless, the phenomena considered worthy of note
have not been those that nurture our survival—the veridical features of
perception—but the oddities or departures from the common and com-
monplaceaccuraciesofperception.Withthemovefromthenaturalworld
tothelaboratorytheodditiesofperceptionmultiplied,andtheyreceived
evermoredetailedscrutiny.
Mygeneralintentionistoexaminetheinterpretationsofthepercep-
tualprocessanditserrorsthroughouthistory.Theemphasisonerrorsof
perception might appear to be a narrow approach, but in fact it encom-
passesvirtuallyallperceptualresearchfromtheancientsuntilthepresent.
The constancies of perception have been taken for granted whereas de-
partures from constancies (errors or illusions) have fostered fascination.
Philosophicalapproachestoperceptionhavebeenbasedonobservations,
anditisthelatterthatareattheforefrontofthepresentbook.Themeth-
odsofrecordingobservationshavebecomemorerefined,butthishasnot
resulted in an increased concern with veridicality. Rather, the range of
illusions that are studied has exploded. Illusions in this context refer to
perceptualdeparturesfromveridicality,ratherthantheconstrainedvari-
etyofgeometrical-opticalillusionsthatsprangforthinthelatenineteenth
century.Anystudyofillusionsispredicatedonanassumptionofastan-
dardfromwhichtheerrorscanbeassessed.Thestandardsthemselveshave
changedoverthecenturies,largelyasaconsequenceofdevelopmentsin
thephysicalandlifesciences.Accordingly,thenatureofperceptualerror
willitselfbeexaminedbeforesurveyingtheseen.
Thus,myintentionistotreatperception,andprincipallyvision,asan
observationaldiscipline.Recordingtheconsequencesofperceptionstarted
vii
viii PREFACE
long before written reports were kept, and so art will be encompassed
within this purview. Writers have remarked on their own visual experi-
encessincewritingwasinvented,sothatalargebodyofobservationshas
accumulated. This body is dissected in the present volume. Descriptions
of visual experience are likely to be anchored in a more solid environ-
mentthanthetheoriesproposedtoaccountforthembecausethetheories
themselves have been dependent upon concepts derived from other dis-
ciplines. The function of vision is to guide our behavior, and in so far as
this guidance is successful, there might seem to be little in the subject to
warrantenquiry.Indeed,theeternallyentertainedtheoryofnaiverealism
speaks to this issue—the world is as it is perceived. Nonetheless, there
were circumstances in which the phenomena of vision were remarkable
andremarkedupon.Visualexperiencesindarkness(asaconsequenceof
pressure or a blow applied to the eyeball) were not only remarked upon
around 500 B.C., but they could have provided the phenomenal source
foremissiontheoriesofvision—thatlightissuesfromtheeyeitself.Such
theories might seem fanciful to us now, but the phenomena upon which
they are based are as readily experienced today as they were two and a
half thousand years ago, and descriptions of them have been repeatedly
refined throughout that period. Afterimages provide a similar example;
theycanbeseenfollowingexposuretobrightlight,theytakeontheshape
oftheintensestimulus,andtheylingerforanappreciabletime.Theycould
haveacted,togetherwiththereflectionsseeninwaterandintheeye,asa
basisforthebeliefthatvisionwasmediatedbyimagesorcopiesofexternal
objects. These phenomena and many others require an interpretation by
any adequate theory of vision; the theories might be supplanted but the
phenomenaremain.
Science involves recording and interpreting natural phenomena.
Nowadays, the records are the results of experiments and the many and
variedphenomenaarepositedinwell-definedcompartments,likephysics,
physiology, and psychology. These compartments are a relatively recent
convention,asarethespecialistswholaborundertitlessuchasphysicists,
physiologists, and psychologists. Neither the phenomena nor the practi-
tionersweresoclearlydefinedinthedistantpast.Inantiquityscience,if
such it should be called, was based upon describing and classifying ob-
servations of naturally occurring events. The sense of science was sight,
andvisionitselfwasanintegralpartofthedevelopmentofscience.What
wasseencouldbedescribed,cataloged,andevensubjectedtomathemat-
ical analysis. Plato’s approach to natural phenomena, however, did not
encourage the observational analysis of vision, because of his distrust of
the evidence of the senses: the world of appearances was considered to
be a world of illusions, and the essence of thought was to be sought in
PREFACE ix
mathematicsandidealforms.Plato’sidealismremainedadominantforce
inbothscienceandphilosophy.Hispreferenceformathematicsovermatter
influencedEuclid,whoformulatedatheoryofvisioningeometricalterms,
withlittleconcernforperceptualexperienceitself.Theseapproachestovi-
sion contrasted sharply with that of Aristotle, who placed more reliance
ontheevidenceofhissensesthanonphilosophicalspeculations.
The phenomena most intimately involved with vision were those of
light. Indeed, the distinction between light and sight was not seriously
entertaineduntilKeplerdescribedtheopticalpropertiesoftheeye,early
in the seventeenth century. Before Kepler, vision was essential to optics,
anddisordersofvisionprovidedmaterialsformedicine.Accordingly,his-
tories of optics and ophthalmology have focused on vision during their
early phases, but have tended to subordinate it when either the physical
natureoflightwasestablishedorthedioptrics,anatomy,andphysiology
oftheeyewerebetterunderstood.Interpretationsoftheperceptualprocess
continuetoevolveandthepresentsurveywillconsiderdevelopmentsin
thetwentiethcenturyaswellasthosefromearliertimes.
The book reflects various strands of historical reseach in perception
thathaveexcitedmyinterest.Theseinterestshavebeensharedwithoth-
ers, to whom thanks are due. Mike Swanston, Mike Cowles, Hiro Ono,
Helen Ross, Stan Finger, Dieter Heller, Ben Tatler, Frans Verstraten, and
Alan Wilkes have all helped to shape my thoughts regarding historical
issues. The errors that survived their shaping should not, of course, be
associated with them but must reflect my reluctance to follow more ap-
propriatelinesofenquiry.Mygreatestsupporthasderivedfrommywife,
Christine.However,itisnottoherthatthebookisdedicated,buttoour
twonewgrandchildrenbornduringitswriting.
Contents
Chapter1. RecordingObservations ........................ 1
ThePracticeofPerception................................ 4
Art.................................................. 5
Color................................................ 11
Optics............................................... 14
GreekScienceandPerception............................. 15
TheIdealandtheObservable........................... 16
TheFiveSenses....................................... 17
TheIntroductionofObservation........................ 20
TheIntroductionofOptics ............................. 22
TheIntroductionofExperiment......................... 23
Summary.............................................. 25
Chapter2. NatureofPerceptualError..................... 29
ComparisonsofPercepts................................. 31
ComparisonswithPhysics ............................... 32
ComparisonswithPhysiology............................ 33
DistalandProximalComparisons......................... 37
Phantoms.............................................. 40
Summary.............................................. 48
Chapter3. NatureofVeridicality.......................... 49
NatureofLight......................................... 50
GreekOptics ......................................... 51
MedievalOptics ...................................... 57
EarlyModernOptics .................................. 58
NatureofSight ......................................... 60
xi