The Imagery Debate
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 10348486 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Kim Sterelny (0000-0003-3159-6698), Michael Tye (0000-0003-2925-3979) |
| Year | 1993 |
| Volume | 53 |
| Issue | 4 |
| Pages | 958-958 |
| Publication date | 1993-12-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Philosophy and Phenomenological Research (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0031-8205 • E-ISSN: 1933-1592 |
| Publisher | Wiley (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.2307/2108269 |
| OpenAlex | W2096041661 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 1 |
One central debate in cognitive science is over imagery. Do images constitute, or constitute evidence for, a distinctive, depictive form of mental representation? The most sophisticated advocacy of this view has been developed by Kosslyn and his coworkers. This paper focuses on his position and argues (i) that though Kosslyn has not developed a satisfactory account of depiction, there is nothing in principle unintelligible about the idea of depictive neural representation, but (ii) Kosslyn's model of imagery rescues the intelligibility of pictorialism at the cost of its explanatory power
Cognition · Mental image · Aesthetic Perception and Analysis · Cognitive Science and Education Research · Embodied and Extended Cognition · Neuroscience · Psychology
| Unique citing works | 1 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 0,06 |
| Citation span | 2008 - 2008 (1) |
| Citation velocity | historical |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 1 |