Advertisement

Topoi

, Volume 36, Issue 2, pp 311–318 | Cite as

Number and Illusion: Representation and Numerosity Perception

  • Michael O’Sullivan
Article

Abstract

It has been claimed that empirical work in psychology requires the attribution of representational content to perceptual states: that is, the attribution of veridicality conditions to those states. This is a claim that can only be evaluated by the examination of actual empirical research. In this paper I argue that talk of ‘representation’ in at least one area of research in the psychology of perception can be reinterpreted so as to avoid the attribution of veridicality conditions. This area is the study of human capacities to perceive the relative numerosities of collections of objects.

Keywords

Perception Perceptual content Representation Numerosity 

References

  1. Austin JL (1962) Sense and sensibilia. Oxford, ClarendonGoogle Scholar
  2. Block N (1990) Inverted earth. In: Tomberlin J (ed) Philosophical perspectives, vol 4. Ridgeview Publishing Co, Atascadero 33: 1–78Google Scholar
  3. Burge T (2005) Disjunctivism and perceptual psychology. Philoso Top 33: 1–78Google Scholar
  4. Burr D, Ross J (2008) A visual sense of number. Curr Biol 18: 425–428Google Scholar
  5. Burr D, Ross J (2012) Number, texture and crowding. Trends Cogn Sci 16(4): 196–197Google Scholar
  6. Chisholm R (1957) Perceiving: a philosophical study. Cornell University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  7. Durgin F (1995) Texture density adaptation and the perceived numerosity and distribution of texture. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 21: 149–169Google Scholar
  8. Durgin F (2008) Texture density adaptation and visual number revisited. Curr Biol 18: R855–R856Google Scholar
  9. Frege G (1892) Über Sinn und Bedeutung. Zeitschrift für Philosophie und philosophische Kritik 100: 25–50Google Scholar
  10. Peacocke C (1992) A study of concepts. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  11. Pelli DG, Tillman KA (2008) The uncrowded window of object recognition. Nat Neurosci 11(10): 1129–1135Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PhilosophyKing’s College LondonLondonUK

Personalised recommendations