----- Original Message -----
From: "david buchanan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, July 30, 2008 7:08 PM
Subject: Re: [MD] Tit's
Krimel said:
If what we "see" were just the raw sense data not only would it be out of
focus, upside down and have a hole in it, it would be entirely two
dimensional. While we can abstract three dimensional models from monocular
input through our experience with visual textures, relative size of near
and distant objects and so forth, binocular vision facilitates the
process.
dmb says:
Visuality and perception are studied by philosophers as well as eye
doctors. I recently learned about an illuminating example of just how
powerful concepts are in the act of perception. Leonardo da Vinci did his
best to carefully observe the internal anatomy for a drawing of the same.
We're talking about an attempt to copy the organs of a corpse onto paper
while looking directly at the actual corpse. But Leo's medical knowledge
came down to him, for the most part, from Galen, an ancient physician who
was wrong about a few things. And these wrong things showed up in da
Vinci's drawings. He didn't copy what he saw so much as what he knew. The
concepts he'd inherited altered his perception despite the care he took to
see clearly. And this is true with all our perceptions. To a degree even
further than you suggest, we can only see what our concepts allow us to
see.
And of course those who make observations about perception are no
exception. We also have inherited certain concepts about anatomy,
particularly the sense organs, and this has a profound effect on what we
can see even with respect to seeing itself. That's why I don't take your
medical descriptions as a serious argument against the MOQ. That's just a
case of swimming in the shallow end of the pool, which isn't really
swimming at all.
Besides, in my case it is not an illusion. I really am out of focus and
upside down. There is also a hole in me but I'd rather not talk about
that. Its just too personal.
Thanks.
Hi David,
We are well accustomed to translate photographs into something realistic.
The fact is that there are all sorts of problems with perspective and
foreshortening in photographs. We no longer see these problems. If I paint
from a photograph, I try to translate what I see in the photograph more into
what I know from having painted from life. It seems there are problems with
what you know. And there are problems with what you see.
Marsha
Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
Archives:
http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
