Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-g7gxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T11:28:52.557Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Gibson's Theory of Perception: A Case of Hasty Epistemologizing?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 April 2022

Edward S. Reed  and
Rebecca K. Jones
Edward S. Reed
Affiliation:
University of Edinburgh
Rebecca K. Jones
Affiliation:
University of Edinburgh
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Hintikka has criticized psychologists for “hasty epistemologizing,” which he takes to be an unwarranted transfer of ideas from psychology (a discipline dealing with questions of fact) into epistemology (a discipline dealing with questions of method and theory). Hamlyn argues, following Hintikka, that Gibson's theory of perception is an example of such an inappropriate transfer, especially insofar as Hamlyn feels Gibson does not answer several important questions. However, Gibson's theory does answer the relevant questions, albeit in a new and radical way, which suggests that the alleged distinction between psychology and epistemology is suspect. In fact, contrary to Hintikka and Hamlyn's claims, Gibson's theory of perception appears to be a valuable source of epistemological as well as psychological ideas.

Type
Research Article
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 45 , Issue 4 , December 1978 , pp. 519 - 530
Copyright
Copyright © Philosophy of Science Association 1978

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

[1] Agassi, J. “Sensationalism.” Mind 75 (1966): 1–24.10.1093/mind/LXXV.297.1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[2] Anscoube, G. E. M. “Comment on Gregory's Paper,” in B. C. Brown (ed) Philosophy of Psychology. London: MacMillan, 1974.Google Scholar
[3] Bach-y-Rita, P. Brain Mechanisms in Sensory Substitution. New York: Academic Press, 1972.Google Scholar
[4] Darwin, C. The Movements and Habits of Climbing Plants. London: Murray, 1875.Google Scholar
[5] Darwin, C. The Power of Movement in Plants. London: Murray, 1881.Google Scholar
[6] Gibson, E. The Principles of Perceptual Learning and Development. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1969.Google Scholar
[7] Gibson, E. & Walk, R. “The Visual Cliff.” Scientific American 202 (1960): 64–71.10.1038/scientificamerican0460-64CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
[8] Gibson, J. “The Concept of The Stimulus in Psychology.” American Psychologist 15 (1960): 694–703.10.1037/h0047037CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[9] Gibson, J. “Ecological Optics.” Vision Research 1 (1961): 253–262.10.1016/0042-6989(61)90005-0CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[10] Gibson, J. “The Survival Value of Sensory Perception.” Biological Prototypes and Synthetic Systems 1 (1962): 230–232.10.1007/978-1-4684-1716-6_32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[11] Gibson, J. “Observations on Active Touch.” Psychological Review 69 (1962): 477–491.10.1037/h0046962CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
[12] Gibson, J. “The Useful Dimensions of Sensitivity.” American Psychologist 18 (1963): 1–15.10.1037/h0046033CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[13] Gibson, J. The Senses Considered as Perceptual Systems. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin, 1966.Google Scholar
[14] Gibson, J. “New Reasons for Realism.” Synthese 17 (1967): 162–172.10.1007/BF00485025CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[15] Gibson, J. “On The Relations Between Hallucinations and Perception.” Leonardo 3 (1970): 425–427.10.2307/1572259CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[16] Gibson, J. “The Myth of Passive Perception: A Reply to Richards.” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 37 (1976): 234–238.10.2307/2107194CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[17] Gibson, J. An Ecological Approach to Visual Perception. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin, In Press.Google Scholar
[18] Gibson, J., Kaplan, G., Reynolds, H., & Wheeler, K. “The Change From Visible to Invisible.” Perception & Psychophysics 5 (1969): 113–116.10.3758/BF03210533CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[19] Grene, M. A Portrait of Aristotle. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1963.Google Scholar
[20] Gruber, H. & Barret, P. Darwin on Man (Together with Darwin's Early & Unpublished Notebooks). New York: E. P. Dutton, 1974.Google Scholar
[21] Hamlyn, D. W. “The Concept of Information in Gibson's Theory of Perception.” Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour 7 (1977): 5–16.10.1111/j.1468-5914.1977.tb00374.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
[22] Hintikka, J. “Information, Causality and The Logic of Perception.” In The Intentions of Intentionality. Boston: D. Reidel, 1975. pp. 59–75.Google Scholar
[23] Kaplan, G. “Kinetic Disruption of Optical Texture: The Perception of Depth at An Edge.” Perception & Psychophysics 6 (1969): 193–198.10.3758/BF03207015CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[24] Mackie, J. Problems from Locke. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1976.10.1093/0198750366.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[25] Morgan, M. J. Molyneux' Problem. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1977.Google Scholar
[26] Neisser, U. Cognition and Reality. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman, 1976.Google Scholar
[27] Neisser, U. Gibson's Ecological Optics: “Consequences of a Different Stimulus Description.” Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour 7 (1977): 17–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[28] Reed, E. & Jones, R. “James Gibson's Ecological Revolution in Psychology.” Philosophy of Social Science (In Press).Google Scholar
[29] Schiff, W. “Perception of Impending Collision.” Psychological Monographs 79 (1965). No. 604.10.1037/h0093887CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
[30] Strong, D. R. & Ray, T. S. “Host Tree Location Behavior of a Tropical Vine (Monstera gigantea) by Skototropism.” Science 190 (1975): 804–806.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[31] Turvey, M. T. “Contrasting Orientations to the Theory of Visual Information Processing.” Psychological Review 34 (1977): 67–88.10.1037/0033-295X.84.1.67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[32] Turvey, M. T. “Preliminaries to a Theory of Action with Reference To Vision.” In Perceiving, Acting and Knowing, ed. R. Shaw & J. Bransford. Hillsdale: Erlbaum Associates, 1977.Google Scholar
[33] Von Holst, E. “Relations between the central nervous system and the peripheral organs.” British Journal of Animal Behaviour 2 (1954): 89–9410.1016/S0950-5601(54)80044-XCrossRefGoogle Scholar
[34] White, B. W., Saunders, F. A., Scadden, L. A., Bach-y-Rita, P., Collins, C. C. “Seeing with the Skin.” Perception & Psychophysics 7 (1970): 23–27.10.3758/BF03210126CrossRefGoogle Scholar