home
***
CD-ROM
|
disk
|
FTP
|
other
***
search
/
Illusion - Is Seeing Really Believing?
/
Illusion - Is Seeing Really Believing (1998)(Marshall Media)[Mac-PC].iso
/
mac
/
ILLUSION
/
SROCK_TX.CXT
/
00179_Text_re38t.txt
< prev
next >
Wrap
Text File
|
1996-12-31
|
2KB
|
51 lines
If the belief that a pictorial
cue is an innate stimulus sign
of depth is one theory and that
it is a learned sign of depth is
another, there is a third
alternative, initially suggested
by the Gestalt psychologists. In
this view, the preference for
the depth ΓÇ£solutionΓÇ¥ over the
two-dimensional ΓÇ£solutionΓÇ¥ of
what a pictorial stimulus
pattern represents in the world
is based on a tendency of the
mind to prefer simplicity.
Suppose, for example, that we
are looking at the pattern
shown to the far left, referred
to as the Necker cube. We
perceive it as three-
dimensional. Why do we not
perceive it as a two-
dimensional arrangement of
lines instead? The Gestalt
answer is that the two-
dimensional percept is a much
more complex structure than
the three-dimensional percept.
A regular cube is quite simple:
all the faces are equal, as are
all the angles, opposite sides
are parallel, and so forth. Now
consider the pattern shown to
the right of the Necker cube. It
tends to appear spontaneously
as two-dimensional. Yet, if
examined carefully, it can be
seen to represent a regular cube
tipped up on an edge, with the
topmost point in the figure
representing the top rear
corner of the cube. For such a
pattern, the two-dimensional
percept is as ΓÇ£simpleΓÇ¥ as that of
a cube: a hexagon with
symmetrically placed straight
lines inside it. Thus, the
advantage of seeing it as a
three-dimensional percept has
disappeared.