Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T03:19:30.377Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Are Pictures Peculiar Objects of Perception?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 February 2018

GABRIELE FERRETTI
GABRIELE FERRETTI*
Affiliation:
UNIVERSITY OF FLORENCEgabriele.ferretti88@gmail.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract:

Are face-to-face perception and picture perception different perceptual phenomena? The question is controversial. On the one hand, philosophers have offered several solid arguments showing that, despite some resemblances, they are quite different perceptual phenomena and that pictures are special objects of perception. On the other hand, neuroscientists routinely use pictures in experimental settings as substitutes for normal objects, and this practice is successful in explaining how the human visual system works. But this seems to imply that face-to-face perception and picture perception are very similar, if not actually the same. How can we decide between these two opposite intuitions? Here I offer a regimentation of the notion of picture perception that can reconcile these two apparently conflicting ideas about pictures. It follows that philosophers and neuroscientists can maintain their respective stances without any theoretical conflict.

Keywords

picture perceptionneuroscienceexperimental settingvisionvisual cortex
Type
Articles
Information
Journal of the American Philosophical Association , Volume 3 , Issue 3 , Fall 2017 , pp. 372 - 393
Copyright
Copyright © American Philosophical Association 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aasen, S. (2015) ‘Pictures, Presence and Visibility’. Philosophical Studies, 187–203. doi:10.1007/s11098-015-0475-4.Google Scholar
Abell, C. (2009) ‘Canny Resemblance’. Philosophical Review, 118, 183–223.Google Scholar
Abell, C., and Bantinaki, K., eds. (2010) Philosophical Perspectives on Depiction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Anelli, F., Borghi, A. M., and Nicoletti, R.. (2012) ‘Grasping the Pain: Motor Resonance with Dangerous Affordances'. Consciousness and Cognition, 21, 1627–39.Google Scholar
Barrett, L. F., and Bar, L. F.. (2009) ‘See it with Feeling: Affective Predictions during Object Perception’. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, 364, 1325–34.Google Scholar
Barry, S. (2009) Fixing My Gaze. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Berryhill, M. E., and Olson, I. R.. (2009) ‘The Representation of Object Distance: Evidence from Neuroimaging and Neuropsychology’. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 3, 1–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Briscoe, R. (2009) ‘Egocentric Spatial Representation in Action and Perception’. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 79, 423–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Briscoe, R. (2016) ‘Depiction, Pictorial Experience, and Vision Science’. In Hill, C. and McLaughlin, B. (eds.), Philosophical Topics, Special Issue on Appearance Properties, 44, 43–81.Google Scholar
Briscoe, R., and Schwenkler, J.. (2015) ‘Conscious Vision in Action’. Cognitive Science, 39, 1435–67.Google Scholar
Bruzzo, A., Borghi, A. M., and Ghirlanda, S.. (2008) ‘Hand-object Interaction in Perspective’. Neuroscience Letters, 441, 61–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buccino, G., Sato, M., Cattaneo, L., Rodà, F., and Riggio, L.. (2009) ‘Broken Affordances, Broken Objects: A TMS Study’. Neuropsychologia, 47, 3074–78.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Castiello, U. (2005) ‘The Neuroscience of Grasping’. Nature Reviews, 6, 726–36.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cavedon-Taylor, D. (2011) ‘The Space of Seeing-In’. British Journal of Aesthetics, 51, 271–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chao, L. L., and Martin, A.. (2000) ‘Representation of Manipulable Man-made Objects in the Dorsal Stream’. NeuroImage, 12, 478–84.Google Scholar
Chasid, A. (2014) ‘Pictorial Experience: Not so Special after all’. Philosophical Studies, 171, 471–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chinellato, E., and del Pobil, A. P.. (2016) The Visual Neuroscience of Robotic Grasping: Achieving Sensorimotor Skills through Dorsal-ventral Stream Integration. Zurich, Switzerland: Springer International Publishing.Google Scholar
Costantini, M., Ambrosini, E., Tieri, G., Sinigaglia, C., and Committeri, G.. (2010) ‘Where Does an Object Trigger an Action? An Investigation about Affordance in Space'. Experimental Brain Research, 207, 95–103.Google Scholar
Cutting, J. (2003) ‘Reconceiving Perceptual Space’. In Hecht, H., Schwartz, R., and Atherton, M. (eds.), Looking into Pictures: An Interdisciplinary Approach to Pictorial Space (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press), 215–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dijkerman, H. C., McIntosh, R. D., Schindler, I., Nijboer, T. C. W., and Milner, A. D.. (2009) ‘Choosing between Alternative Wrist Postures: Action Planning Needs Perception’. Neuropsychologia, 47, 1476–82.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Elliott, R., Dolan, R. J., and Frith, C. D.. (2000) ‘Dissociable Functions in the Medial and Lateral Orbitofrontal Cortex: Evidence from Human Neuroimaging Studies’. Cerebral Cortex, 10, 308–17. doi:10.1093/cercor/10.3.308.Google Scholar
Ferretti, G. (2016a) ‘Pictures, Action Properties and Motor-related Effects’. Synthese Special Issue Neuroscience and Its Philosophy, 193, 3787–817. doi:10.1007/s11229-016-1097-x.Google Scholar
Ferretti, G. (2016b) ‘Through the Forest of Motor Representations’. Consciousness and Cognition, 43, 177–96. doi:10.1016/j.concog.2016.05.013.Google Scholar
Ferretti, G. (2016c) ‘Visual Feeling of Presence.’ Pacific Philosophical Quarterly. doi:10.1111/papq.12170.Google Scholar
Ferretti, G. (2017a) ‘Pictures, Emotions, and the Dorsal/Ventral account of Picture Perception’. Review of Philosophy and Psychology, 8, 595–616. doi:10.1007/s13164-017-0330-y.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferretti, G. (2017b). ‘Two Visual Systems in Molyneux Subjects’. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences, 1–37. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11097-017-9533-z.Google Scholar
Gombrich, E. (1960) Art and Illusion. New York: Pantheon.Google Scholar
Gonzalez, C., Ganel, T., Whitwell, R., Morrissey, B., and Goodale, M.. (2008) ‘Practice Makes Perfect, but Only with the Right Hand: Sensitivity to Perceptual Illusions with Awkward Grasps Decreases with Practice in the Right, but not the Left Hand’. Neuropsychologia, 46, 624–31.Google Scholar
Goodale, M. A., and Milner, A. D.. (2004) Sight Unseen. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Gregory, R. L., (2012) ‘Pictures as Strange Objects of Perception’. In Barth, F. G., Giampieri-Deutsch, P., and Klein, H.-D. (eds.), Sensory Perception: Mind and Matter (Amsterdam: Springer), 175–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grézes, J., and Decety, J.. (2002) ‘Does Visual Perception of Object Afford Action? Evidence from a Neuroimaging Study’. Neuropsychologia, 40, 212–22.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Grill-Spector, K. and Weiner, K. S.. (2014) ‘The Functional Architecture of the Ventral Temporal Cortex and its Role in Categorization’. Nature Reviews, Neuroscience, 15, 536–48 doi:10.1038/nrn3747.Google Scholar
Grush, R. (2000) ‘Self, World, and Space: The Meaning and Mechanisms of Ego- and Allocentric Spatial Representation’. Brain and Mind, 1, 59–92.Google Scholar
Hecht, H., Schwartz, R., and Atherton, M., eds. (2003) Looking into Pictures: An Interdisciplinary Approach to Pictorial Space. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Hopkins, R. (2010) ‘Inflected Pictorial Experience: Its Treatment and Significance’. In Abell, C. and Bantinaki, K. (eds.), Philosophical Perspectives on Depiction (Oxford: Oxford University Press), 151–80.Google Scholar
Hopkins, R. (2012) ‘Seeing-in and Seeming to See’. Analysis, 72, 650–59.Google Scholar
Jacob, P., and Jeannerod, M.. (2003) Ways of Seeing: The Scope and Limits of Visual Cognition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
James, T., Humphrey, G., Gati, J., Menon, R., and Goodale, M.. (2002) ‘Differential Effects of Viewpoint on Object-driven Activation in Dorsal and Ventral Stream’. Neuron, 35, 793–801.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jeannerod, M., Decety, J., and Michel, F.. (1994) ‘Impairment of Grasping Movements Following a Bilateral Posterior Parietal Lesion’. Neuropsychologia, 32, 369–380.Google Scholar
Koenderink, J. J. (2012) Pictorial Space. Utrecht: De Clootcrans Press.Google Scholar
Koenderink, J. J., and van Doorn, A. J.. (2003) ‘Pictorial Space’. In Hecht, H., Schwartz, R., and Atherton, M. (eds.), Looking into Pictures: An Interdisciplinary Approach to Pictorial Space (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press), 215–38.Google Scholar
Kulvicki, J. (2006) On Images. Oxford: Clarendon Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levinson, J. (1998) ‘Wollheim On Pictorial Representation’. Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, 56, 227–33.Google Scholar
Lopes, D. M. (1996) Understanding Pictures. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Lopes, D.M. (2005) Sight and Sensibility: Evaluating Pictures. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Marotta, J., and Goodale, M.. (2001) ‘The Role of Familiar Size in the Control of Grasping’. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 13, 8–17.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Matthen, M. (2005) Seeing, Doing and Knowing: A Philosophical Theory of Sense Perception. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Milner, A. D., and Goodale, M. A.. (1995]2006) The Visual Brain in Action. 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Milner, A. D., and Goodale, M. A.. (2008) ‘Two Visual Systems Re-viewed’. Neuropsychologia, 46, 774–85.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Murata, A., Gallese, V., Luppino, G., Kaseda, M., and Sakata, H.. (2000) ‘Selectivity for the Shape, Size and Orientation of Objects for Grasping in Neurons of Monkey Parietal Area AIP.’ Journal of Neurophisiology, 79, 2580–2601.Google Scholar
Nanay, B. (2010a) ‘Transparency and Sensorimotor Contingencies: Do We See through Photographs?’ Pacific Philosophical Quarterly, 91, 463–80.Google Scholar
Nanay, B. (2010b) ‘Inflected and Uninflected Experience of Pictures’. In Abell, C. and Bantilaki, K. (eds.), Philosophical Perspectives on Depiction (Oxford: Oxford University Press), 181–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nanay, B. (2011) ‘Perceiving Pictures’. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences, 10, 461–80.Google Scholar
Nanay, B. (2013) Between Perception and Action. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Nanay, B. (2015) ‘Trompe l'oeil and the Dorsal/ventral Account of Picture Perception’. Review of Philosophy and Psychology, 6, 181–97.Google Scholar
Nanay, B. (2016) Aesthetics as Philosophy of Perception. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Nanay, B. (2017) 'Threefoldness’. Philosophical Studies, 1–20. doi:10.1007/s11098-017-0860-2.Google Scholar
Nelissen, K., Joly, O., Durand, J. B., Todd, J. T., Vanduffel, W., and Orban, G. A.. (2009) ‘The Extraction of Depth Structure from Shading and Texture in the Macaque Brain.’ PloS One, 4 (12), e8306. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0008306.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Noë, A. (2004) Action in Perception. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
O'Reilly, R. C. (2010) ‘The What and How of Prefrontal Cortical Organization’. Trends in Neurosciences, 33, 355–61.Google Scholar
Pani, P., Theys, T., Romero, M. C., and Janssen, P.. (2014) ‘Grasping Execution and Grasping Observation Activity of Single Neurons in the Macaque Anterior Intraparietal Area’. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 26, 2342–55.Google Scholar
Phillips, M. L., Marks, I. M., Senior, C., Lythgoe, D., O'Dwyer, A. M., Meehan, O., et al. (2000) ‘A Differential Neural Response in Obsessive-compulsive Disorder Patients with Washing Compared with Checking Symptoms to Disgust.’ Psychological Medicine, 30, 1037–50.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Proverbio, M. A., Adorni, R., and D'Aniello, G. E.. (2011) ‘250 ms to Code for Action Affordance During Observation of Manipulable Objects’. Neuropsychologia, 49, 2711–19.Google Scholar
Raos, V., Umilta, M. A., Murata, A., Fogassi, L., and, V. Gallese. (2006) ‘Functional Properties of Grasping-related Neurons in the Ventral Premotor Area F5 of the Macaque Monkey’. Journal of Neurophysiology, 95, 709–29.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Romero, M. C., Pani, P., and Janssen, P.. (2014) ‘Coding of Shape features in the macaque anterior intraparietal area systems/circuits.’ The Journal of Neuroscience, 34 (11), 4006–4021.Google Scholar
Sakata, H., Taira, M., Murata, A., and Mine, S.. (1995) ‘Neural Mechanisms of Visual Guidance of Hand Action in the Parietal Cortex of the Monkey’. Cerebral Cortex, 5, 429–38.Google Scholar
Sakata, H., Tsutsui, K., and Taira, M.. (2003) Representation of the 3D world in art and in the brain., International Congress Series, 1250, 5–35.Google Scholar
Schienle, A., Schäfer, A., Hermann, A., Walter, B., Stark, R., and Vaitl, D.. (2006) ‘fMRI Responses to Pictures of Mutilation and Contamination’. Neuroscience Letters, 393, 174–78.Google Scholar
Schwartz, R., and Atherton, M., eds. (2003). Looking into Pictures: An Interdisciplinary Approach to Pictorial Space. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Schwenkler, J. (2013) ‘Do Things Look the Way they Feel?’ Analysis, 73, 86–96.Google Scholar
Shapira, N.A., Liu, Y., He, A.G., Bradley, M. M., Lessig, M. C., James, G. A., Stein, D. J., Lang, P. J., and Goodman, W. K.. (2003) ‘Brain Activation by Disgust-inducing Pictures in Obsessive-compulsive Disorder’. Biological Psychiatry, 54, 751–56.Google Scholar
Siegel, S. (2007) ‘How Can We Discover the Contents of Experience?’ Southern Journal of Philosophy (Supp.), 45, 127–42.Google Scholar
Siegel, S. (2010) The Contents of Visual Experience. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Snow, J. C., Pettypiece, C. E., MacAdam, T. D., McLean, A. D., Stroman, P. W., Goodale, M. A., and Culham, J. C.. (2011) ‘Bringing the Real World into the fMRI Scanner: Repetition Effects for Pictures versus Real Objects’. Scientific Reports, 1. doi: 10.1038/srep00130.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Taira, M., Nose, I., Inoue, K., and Tsutsui, K.. (2001) ‘Cortical Areas Related to Attention to 3D Surface.’ Neuroimage, 14, 959–66.Google Scholar
Turnbull, O. H., Driver, J., and McCarthy, R. A.. (2004) ‘2D but not 3D: Pictorial Depth Deficits in a Case of Visual Agnosia.’ Cortex, 40, 723–38.Google Scholar
Vishwanath, D. (2011). ‘Information in Surface and Depth Perception: Reconciling Pictures and Reality’. In Albertazzi, L., van Tonder, G. J., and Vishwanath, D. (eds.), Perception Beyond Inference: The Information Content of Visual Processes (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press), 201–40.Google Scholar
Vishwanath, D. (2014) ‘Toward a New Theory of Stereopsis’. Psychological Review, 121, 151–78.Google Scholar
Vishwanath, D., and Hibbard, P.. (2010) ‘Quality in Depth Perception: The Plastic Effect’. Journal of Vision, 10, 1673–85.Google Scholar
Vishwanath, D., and Hibbard, P.. (2013) ‘Seeing in 3D With Just One Eye: Stereopsis in the Absence of Binocular Disparities’. Psychological Science, 24, 1673–85.Google Scholar
Vishwanath, D., Girshick, A. R., Banks, andM. S.. (2005) ‘Why Pictures look Right when Viewed from the Wrong Place’. Nature Neuroscience, 8, 1401–10.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Voltolini, A. (2013) ‘Why, As Responsible for Figurativity, Seeing-In Can Only be Inflected Seeing-In’. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences, 14, 651–67. doi:10.1007/s11097-013-9335-x.Google Scholar
Westwood, D., Danckert, J., Servos, P., and Goodale, M.. (2002) ‘Grasping two-dimensional Images and three-dimensional Objects in visual-form Agnosia’. Experimental Brain Research, 144, 262–67.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wollheim, R. (1980) ‘Seeing-As, Seeing-In, and Pictorial Representation’. In Wollheim, R. (ed.), Art and its Object, 2nd ed. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), 205–26.Google Scholar
Wollheim, R. (1998) ‘On Pictorial Representation’. Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, 56: 217–26.Google Scholar
Wright, P., He, G., Shapira, N. A., Goodman, W. K., and Liu, Y.. (2004) ‘Disgust and the Insula: fMRI Responses to Pictures of Mutilation and Contamination’. Neuroreport, 15, 2347–51.Google Scholar
Zipoli Caiani, S. (2013) ‘Extending the notion of affordance.’ Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences, 13, 275–93.Google Scholar
Zipoli Caiani, S., and Ferretti, G.. (2017) ‘Semantic and Pragmatic Integration in Vision for Action’. Consciousness and Cognition, 48, 40–54.Google Scholar