Another way to analyze the 
issue is to note that we do not 
see our own retinal images. We 
see on the basis of the 
information contained within 
them. The information about 
orientation contained within 
them is no more distorted by 
the fact that it is in its entirety 
upside down than is the 
information about the relative 
size of things distorted by the 
fact that the image is a 
miniature replica of the scene 
it represents. After all, we do 
not wonder why things look as 
large as they do simply because 
their retinal images are so 
much smaller than the things 
they represent.

    Puzzlement over the fact that 
upright vision results from an 
inverted image may derive from 
adherence to the camera theory 
of visual perception: The eye 
sends a picture into the brain 
where an upright inner 
"observer" looks at it. If that 
picture is upside down, it ought 
to appear so to that inner 
"observer." However, a sensory 
stimulus such as the retinal 
image in the eye should be 
thought of more as an encoding 
of the information in the 
world, not as an exact copy of 
it. Moreover, as we have seen 
repeatedly, the resulting 
perception should not be 
thought of as an exact copy of 
the retinal image. Thus, the 
fact that uprightness of vision 
is achieved despite an inverted 
retinal image is a
pseudoproblem.