Philosophy and psychology related to the hypothesis of extended cognition
Tuesday, September 7, 2010
What's the "trick" here?
In some comments over at "Notes from Two Scientific Psychologists" here and here, I have been wondering about the Gibsonian claim that "Only the eye considered as a fixed camera can be deceived. The actual binocular visual system cannot. (Gibson, 1979, p. 281)" and that "all illusions are tricks". I am curious about the snake illusion and certain auditory illusions. What's the trick in these cases?
But certain cases of amodal completion raise the same problem. The illusion is that some occluded object looks circular, when it is not. What's the "trick" in these cases?
Now, I know that Gibsonians often worry about 2D drawn illusions, but at least some of the problematic amodal completion cases seem not to depend on the 2D character of the illusion. Readers can verify this for themselves by creating circular "tiles" with parts cut out and see for themselves.
Seeing, however, as I learned how to use Windows Moviemaker for my appearance on Philosophy TV, I thought I would venture to add some video showing the "tile" I made. The video is not meant to replace doing the demo for one's self, but it was fun for me to make. How many philosophers add video to their blogs? (It's a good thing I'm not dreaming of going to film school, but that's another matter.)