Filling In: Why Dennett Is Wrong

In Enrique Villanueva (ed.), Perception. Ridgeview Pub. Co (1996)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

In this joint study the phenomenon of “filling in” or “blind spot” is discussed, and arguments against the theories of Dennett on the same topic are provided. The central point of contention is whether the brain bridges the data gap to “fill in” the incomplete visual stimuli, or does it simply ignore the deficiency caused by the blind spot, as what Dennett, a noted cognitive scientist, believes. Several experiments in psychophysics are conducted to obtain a rich pool of objective data from which conclusions can be drawn. Related studies in neurophysiology, such as the Krauskopf, Gattass, and Gilbert effects, are also cited and discussed. In summary, this chapter's findings are as follows: the human brain has a means of interpolating visual stimuli; “filling in” can be visually represented by the brain; and that this visual representation probably involves the brain's capacity for interpolation.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 101,219

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Attention and Blind-Spot Phenomenology.Liang Lou & Jing Chen - 2003 - PSYCHE: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Research On Consciousness 9.
Blindsight in the blind spot.K. Kranda - 1998 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (6):762-763.
On the Function of Visual Representation.H. Ballard Dana - 1996 - In Enrique Villanueva (ed.), Perception. Ridgeview Pub. Co.

Analytics

Added to PP
2016-10-25

Downloads
6 (#1,698,044)

6 months
6 (#873,397)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

Aristotle's Theory of Abstraction.Allan Bäck - 2014 - Cham, Switzerland: Springer.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references