, Volume 83, Issue 6, pp 1265–1284 | Cite as

Balint’s Syndrome, Visual Motion Perception, and Awareness of Space

  • Bartek ChomanskiEmail author
Original Research


Kant, Wittgenstein, and Husserl all held that visual awareness of objects requires visual awareness of the space in which the objects are located. There is a lively debate in the literature on spatial perception whether this view is undermined by the results of experiments on a Balint’s syndrome patient, known as RM. I argue that neither of two recent interpretations of these results is able to explain RM’s apparent ability to experience motion. I outline some ways in which each interpretation may respond to this challenge, and suggest which way of meeting the challenge is preferable. I conclude that RM retains some awareness of the larger space surrounding the objects he sees.



I am grateful to Robert Briscoe, Alissa Mandrigin, John Schwenkler, and the anonymous reviewer for this journal for detailed comments on a previous version of this paper. I have also benefited from discussing this paper with Eli Chudnoff and Brit Brogaard.


  1. Baylis, G. C., & Baylis, L. L. (2001). Visually misguided reaching in Balint’s syndrome. Neuropsychologia, 39(8), 865–875.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Blake, R., Tadin, D., Sobel, K. V., Raissian, T. A., & Chong, S. C. (2006). Strength of early visual adaptation depends on visual awareness. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 103(12), 4783–4788. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0509634103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Block, N. (2007). Consciousness, accessibility, and the mesh between psychology and neuroscience. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 30(5–6), 481–499. doi: 10.1017/s0140525x07002786. (discussion 499–548).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Braddick, O. (1993). Segmentation versus integration in visual motion processing. Trends in Neurosciences, 16(7), 263–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Briscoe, R. (2014). Spatial content and motoric significance. AVANT. Pismo Awangardy Filozoficzno-Naukowej, 5(2), 199–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Brogaard, B. (2011). Are there unconscious perceptual processes? Consciousness and Cognition, 20(2), 449–463. doi: 10.1016/j.concog.2010.10.002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Brogaard, B. (2015). Type 2 blindsight and the nature of visual experience. Consciousness and Cognition, 32, 92–103. doi: 10.1016/j.concog.2014.09.017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Campbell, J. (2007). What’s the role of spatial awareness in visual perception of objects? Mind and Language, 22(5), 548–562. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-0017.2007.00320.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Foley, R. (2015). The case for characterising type-2 blindsight as a genuinely visual phenomenon. Consciousness and Cognition, 32, 56–67. doi: 10.1016/j.concog.2014.09.005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. French, C. (in preparation). Bálint’s syndrome and the structure of visual experience. Retrieved from
  11. Friedman-Hill, S., Robertson, L. C., & Treisman, A. (1995). Parietal contributions to visual feature-binding: Evidence from a patient with bilateral lesions. Science, 269, 853–855.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Husserl, E. (1997). Thing and space: Lectures of 1907 (R. Rojcewicz, Trans.). Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  13. Kant, I.: Critique of pure reason (N. Kemp Smith, Trans.). New York: Palgrave Macmillan (1787/2007).Google Scholar
  14. Kaunitz, L., Fracasso, A., & Melcher, D. (2011). Unseen complex motion is modulated by attention and generates a visible aftereffect. Journal of Vision, 11(13), 10. doi: 10.1167/11.13.10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Maruya, K., Watanabe, H., & Watanabe, M. (2008). Adaptation to invisible motion results in low-level but not high-level aftereffects. Journal of Vision, 8(11), 7. doi: 10.1167/8.11.7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Mather, G. (2005). Motion perception, psychology. In L. Nadel (Ed.), Encyclopedia of cognitive science. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.Google Scholar
  17. Nishida, S. Y., & Ashida, H. (2000). A hierarchical structure of motion system revealed by interocular transfer of flicker motion aftereffects. Vision Research, 40(3), 265–278. doi: 10.1016/S0042-6989(99)00176-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Peacocke, C. (1992). A study of concepts. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  19. Robertson, L. C. (2003). Binding, spatial attention and perceptual awareness. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 4(2), 93–102. doi: 10.1038/nrn1030.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Robertson, L. C., Treisman, A., Friedman-Hill, S., & Grabowecky, M. (1997). The interaction of spatial and object pathways: evidence from Balint’s syndrome. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 9(3), 295–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Sally, S. L., & Gurnsey, R. (2003). Orientation discrimination in foveal and extra-foveal vision: Effects of stimulus bandwidth and contrast. Vision Research, 43(12), 1375–1385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Schwenkler, J. (2012). Does visual spatial awareness require the visual awareness of space. Mind and Language, 27(3), 308–329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Snowden, R. J., & Freeman, T. C. (2004). The visual perception of motion. Current Biology, 14(19), R828–R831.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Stevens, J., Emerson, R., Gerstein, G., Kallos, T., Neufeld, G., Nichols, C., et al. (1976). Paralysis of the awake human: Visual perceptions. Vision Research, 16(1), 93–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Thorpe, S. J., Gegenfurtner, K. R., Fabre-Thorpe, M., & Buelthoff, H. H. (2001). Detection of animals in natural images using far peripheral vision. European Journal of Neuroscience, 14(5), 869–876.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Watanabe, K. (2005). The motion-induced position shift depends on the visual awareness of motion. Vision Research, 45(19), 2580–2586. doi: 10.1016/j.visres.2005.03.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Weiskrantz, L. (1998). Pupillary responses with and without awareness in blindsight. Consciousness and Cognition, 7(3), 324–326. doi: 10.1006/ccog.1998.0360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Weiskrantz, L. (2002). Prime-sight and blindsight. Consciousness and Cognition, 11(4), 568–581.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Wittgenstein, L. (1975). Philosophical remarks (R. Hargreaves & R. White, Trans.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Philosophy and ReligionNortheastern UnviersityBostonUSA

Personalised recommendations