An Essay Towards a New Theory of VisionBerkeley, George
Philosophy
An Essay Towards a New Theory of Vision
Berkeley, George
Vision -- Early works to 1800
115. But, say you, the picture of the man is inverted, and yet the
appearance is erect: I ask, what mean you by the picture of the man, or,
which is the same thing, the visible man's being inverted? You tell me it
is inverted, because the heels are uppermost and the head undermost?
Explain me this. You say that by the head's being undermost you mean that
it is nearest to the earth; and by the heels being uppermost that they
are farthest from the earth. I ask again what earth you mean? You cannot
mean the earth that is painted on the eye, or the visible earth: for the
picture of the head is farthest from the picture of the earth, and the
picture of the feet nearest to the picture of the earth; and accordingly
the visible head is farthest from the visible earth, and the visible feet
nearest to it. It remains, therefore, that you mean the tangible earth,
and so determine the situation of visible things with respect to tangible
things; contrary to what hath been demonstrated in sect. 111 and 112. The
two distinct provinces of sight and touch should be considered apart, and
as if their objects had no intercourse, no manner of relation one to
another, in point of distance or position.
116. Farther, what greatly contributes to make us mistake in this matter
is that when we think of the pictures in the fund of the eye, we imagine
ourselves looking on the fund of another's eye, or another looking on the
fund of our own eye, and beholding the pictures painted thereon. Suppose
two eyes A and B: A from some distance looking on the pictures in B sees
them inverted, and for that reason concludes they are inverted in B: but
this is wrong. There are projected in little on the bottom of A the
images of the pictures of, suppose, man, earth, etc., which are painted
on B. And besides these the eye B itself, and the objects which environ
it, together with another earth, are projected in a larger size on A.
Now, by the eye A these larger images are deemed the true objects, and
the lesser only pictures in miniature. And it is with respect to those
greater images that it determines the situation of the smaller images: so
that comparing the little man with the great earth, A judges him
inverted, or that the feet are farthest from and the head nearest to the
great earth. Whereas, if A compare the little man with the little earth,
then he will appear erect, i.e. his head shall seem farthest from, and
his feet nearest to, the little earth. But we must consider that B does
not see two earths as A does: it sees only what is represented by the
little pictures in A, and consequently shall judge the man erect. For, in
truth, the man in B is not inverted, for there the feet are next the
earth; but it is the representation of it in A which is inverted, for
there the head of the representation of the picture of the man in B is
next the earth, and the feet farthest from the earth, meaning the earth
which is without the representation of the pictures in B. For if you take
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account