Yes, illusions occur at the level of perception. The researchers in the article even speak briefly about the currently accepted theories on visual neurobiology involving the retinas, nerve cells, etc. The current theories even explain some of the types of visual illusions that people fall into. However, what is novel here is that the researchers have isolated certain types of visual illusions that current theories can't readily explain, and the researches have come up with a theory that *can* account for these specific types of visual illusions, as well as all the others, *and* their theories _may_ prove to be generalizable to the other sense perceptions occuring in the cerebral cortex. In no way is this banal observation.
"their claim is banal - the obvious fact that our eyes are only capable of creating objects in our 'minds' based on things that have been saliant in the past"
I disagree. Their claim, basically that the perception of visual stimuli is more like a reflex--an autonomic action--than a higher order analytical function, is hardly banal. It goes against almost all currently accepted thought on the subject.
I also don't think they were stating that we don't get any new ideas from visual stimuli--that would be obviously false, as you say. Just that how we make sense of that stimuli has to do with what we have to draw on--our past experience, personal or evolutionary.
Phoenix 0.4 (at least, not sure about earlier releases) will search google directly from the address bar. Type in a search term, and if phoenix can't find an http server on the local net with that name, it will load up the first page returned by google for that search term.
Yeah, I voted in a church, too. That's not what gets me, though. I'm pissed because in the grand state of North Carolina, voter authentication is amazingly lame. They ask for your name, look up your address in a book, and while pointing to it, ask you to verify your address. If I knew that my neighbor wasn't going to vote, I could just as easily vote for him as I could for myself. They say 'vote early, vote often!' I used to laugh at that.
How did I vote? Well, in NC a vote for Nader is a wasted vote (it literally counts only as a protest vote, it is not counted toward the election, nor will it bring him any closer to the 5% mark...), so I couldn't vote my conscience. I actually found myself placing a mark next to Al Gore's name. I'm sickened by the process, and I sincerely hope that the Green party gets federal funds next go round!
Slashdot Mirror
Try this:
perl -e'local $/;print pack "B*", '
Yes, illusions occur at the level of perception. The researchers in the article even speak briefly about the currently accepted theories on visual neurobiology involving the retinas, nerve cells, etc. The current theories even explain some of the types of visual illusions that people fall into. However, what is novel here is that the researchers have isolated certain types of visual illusions that current theories can't readily explain, and the researches have come up with a theory that *can* account for these specific types of visual illusions, as well as all the others, *and* their theories _may_ prove to be generalizable to the other sense perceptions occuring in the cerebral cortex. In no way is this banal observation.
"their claim is banal - the obvious fact that our eyes are only capable of creating objects in our 'minds' based on things that have been saliant in the past"
I disagree. Their claim, basically that the perception of visual stimuli is more like a reflex--an autonomic action--than a higher order analytical function, is hardly banal. It goes against almost all currently accepted thought on the subject.
I also don't think they were stating that we don't get any new ideas from visual stimuli--that would be obviously false, as you say. Just that how we make sense of that stimuli has to do with what we have to draw on--our past experience, personal or evolutionary.
Phoenix 0.4 (at least, not sure about earlier releases) will search google directly from the address bar. Type in a search term, and if phoenix can't find an http server on the local net with that name, it will load up the first page returned by google for that search term.
Crazy!
Yeah, I voted in a church, too. That's not what gets me, though. I'm pissed because in the grand state of North Carolina, voter authentication is amazingly lame. They ask for your name, look up your address in a book, and while pointing to it, ask you to verify your address. If I knew that my neighbor wasn't going to vote, I could just as easily vote for him as I could for myself. They say 'vote early, vote often!' I used to laugh at that.
How did I vote? Well, in NC a vote for Nader is a wasted vote (it literally counts only as a protest vote, it is not counted toward the election, nor will it bring him any closer to the 5% mark...), so I couldn't vote my conscience. I actually found myself placing a mark next to Al Gore's name. I'm sickened by the process, and I sincerely hope that the Green party gets federal funds next go round!
Erich
"The lesser of two evils is still evil."