to point _b_; double images then which occur as a result of divergence
(whether relative or absolute) must appear crossed, and one will easily
be able to infer that for the same reasons those double images which
occur in consequence of convergence, must be homonymous. All this,
however, only with the presupposition, that the habit of binocular
fixation is already fully developed; any disturbance of the same, in
whatever way (by prisms, mechanical displacement of the eyes, paralyses
of the ocular muscles, or by those forms of squint which arise after
childhood is past) causes the double images to illustrate the law above
explained. Certainly diplopia may be absent even then, but only in very
rare instances. Now and then this happens in objectively proved ailments
of the ocular muscles, where the patients complain of disturbed vision,
which disappears immediately on the exclusion of one eye (see Case 12),
a method of relief they usually discover for themselves; thus the
indistinct vision is seen at once to be a disturbance of binocular
vision. Many such patients learn to see the double images which formerly
escaped them, after they have been instructed how to do so during the
examination. With others, all efforts are in vain, it is impossible to
render them conscious of the double images, notwithstanding that the
presence of the binocular disturbance of vision proves that the habit of
binocular fixation exists. This apparent contradiction is explained, if
one reflects that the physiological basis of vision rests on a series of
conclusions. The first thing which strikes us as a result of binocular
fixation is, that the images of the centres of the retinæ may be
referred to one and the same region of the room, and this experience
will be retained, even if the images on the centres of the retinæ
represent different objects in consequence of paralysis of the ocular
muscles; the images are notwithstanding referred to one and the same
part of the room, all objects are thrown together promiscuously, and the
consequent embarrassment is of course removed directly one eye is shut.
The experience of those patients whom it is impossible to render
conscious of double images, despite the habit of binocular fixation,
reaches up to this point. A second conclusion belongs to diplopia, and
for that it is necessary to seek out from the confusion of objects, the
two retinal images belonging to one and the same object, and the
majority of people, though not all, take this second step also. It is
seen at the same time that the opinion held by Donders, that diplopia is
absent in squint, does not suffice, for this reason, because the image
in the deviating eye is too excentric. What becomes then of the image
lying in the centre of the retina?
[Illustration: FIG. 2.]
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.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account