tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1483944200593561804.post7478515581793865837..comments2023-12-20T19:30:28.788-05:00Comments on Fixing Psychology: Specification and Perception - Fodor and Pylyshyn (1981)Eric Charleshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17412168482569793996noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1483944200593561804.post-71886390912779353122013-02-13T11:57:07.291-05:002013-02-13T11:57:07.291-05:00It is truly a great and helpful piece of informati...It is truly a great and helpful piece of information.I am satisfied that you simply shared this useful information with us.<br />Please stay us informed like this. Thanks for sharing.<br /><br /><a href="http://latestlaptopinfo.com/" rel="nofollow">Laptop specification</a>Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05712013343660452195noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1483944200593561804.post-76503736696506015942012-06-23T05:34:44.190-04:002012-06-23T05:34:44.190-04:00You are not going to convince me that the Master i...<i>You are not going to convince me that the Master is right by telling me more of what the Master says. You need to spell out how the stuff the Master says is going to solve the problem.</i><br />Also, part of what is happening here is Eric pointing out that F&P are arguing against things Gibson didn't say or believe, so a little repetition of what he <i>actually</i> said does serve a Andrewhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16732977871048876430noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1483944200593561804.post-27928382749385995162012-06-22T09:15:20.821-04:002012-06-22T09:15:20.821-04:00The Mach bands don't go away because they'...The Mach bands don't go away because they're a side effect of the retina's wiring, presumably a smart and embodied mechanism for enhancing contrast. So that's still not a counter example to anything TSM say.Andrewhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16732977871048876430noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1483944200593561804.post-43244384636245831222012-06-22T08:50:36.134-04:002012-06-22T08:50:36.134-04:00Ken,
Quite right! Also, it is awesome to know that...Ken,<br />Quite right! Also, it is awesome to know that someone actually read this. When I was done, and realized how long it was, I feared no one would. <br /><br />As noted in the intro, this is a summary of F&P, with short quips interspersed. Hopefully, within the next two days, I will be able to outline what I think the reply should have looked like. It will involve a lot of reframing, Eric Charleshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17412168482569793996noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1483944200593561804.post-51876013840342301072012-06-22T08:17:07.008-04:002012-06-22T08:17:07.008-04:00"What you see at time t is a function of the ..."What you see at time t is a function of the information you have roughly now"<br /><br />should be<br /><br />"What you see now is a function of the information you have roughly now"Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08539727534751588479noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1483944200593561804.post-25733485794904534922012-06-22T08:15:55.328-04:002012-06-22T08:15:55.328-04:00"They have ignored two important points in Gi..."They have ignored two important points in Gibson's writings: ... . 2) If an organism does, at a particular time, have access to under-specifying patterns, it can always keep looking. "<br /><br />They would ignore this, because it won't help in so many cases. What you see at time t is a function of the information you have roughly now, but not the information you might get if Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08539727534751588479noreply@blogger.com