THE VISUAL EXPERIENCE OF CAUSATION
By S. Siegel. 2009
95 citations recorded by the source corpus.
The thesis that we can visually perceive causal relations is distinct from the thesis that visual experiences can represent causal relations. I defend the latter thesis about visual experience, and argue that although they are suggestive, the data provided by Albert Michotte's experiments on perceptual causality do not establish this thesis. Turning to the perception of causality, I defend the claim that we can perceive causation against the objection that its arcane features are unlikely to be represented in experience.
Subfields: Cognitive Neuroscience
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/8ee6bbce5a669600c530524cb3eb5c7e7a5240a7
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Cognitive Neuroscience
Citations in the corpus
- Perceptual content and the content of mental imagery (2015, background): “A couple of quick examples: it has been argued that we perceive objects as trees and tables (Siegel 2006), as being causally efficacious (Siegel 2005, 2009), as edible, climbable or Q-able in general (Nanay 2011a, 2012a), as agents (Scholl andTremoullet 2000), as having somekindof normative…”