Quasi-pictorial images face an infinite regress

Pictures are intrinsically perspectival, so the notion of the quasi-pictorial image makes the assumption of a point of view, or a mind’s eye. As a result, the use of quasi-pictorial images falls into an infinite regress of interpretations.


The image must be interpreted by the mind's eye, but then that perspective must also be interpreted, because the mind's eye then becomes part of the image, and so on ad infinitum.

Therefore, the idea of a picture-like representations in the mind is incoherent.

Argument anticipated by Stephen Kosslyn and James Pomerantz, 1977.
RELATED ARTICLESExplain
Artificial Intelligence
Can computers think? [1]
No: computers can't understand images [5b]
Images represented by filled cells in an array
Images are Quasi-pictorial representations
Quasi-pictorial images face an infinite regress
Machine implementations show computational power
Regard mind's eye as a classification scheme
Image Psychology
Quasi-pictorial view can’t explain some image effects
Graph of this discussion
Enter the title of your article


Enter a short (max 500 characters) summation of your article
Enter the main body of your article
Lock
+Comments (0)
+Citations (0)
+About
Enter comment

Select article text to quote
welcome text

First name   Last name 

Email

Skip