Psychology (q.v.) recognizes two uses of the term. The simplest is for
the impression made by an observed object on the retina, the eye; in
this connexion the term "after-image" (better "after-sensation") is used
for an image which remains when the eye is withdrawn from a brilliantly
lighted object; it is called positive when the colour remains the same,
negative when the complementary colours are seen. The strict
psychological use of the term "image" is by analogy from the
physiological for a purely mental idea which is taken as being observed
by the eye of the mind. These images are created or produced not by an
external stimulus, such as is necessary for a visual image (even the
after-image is due to the continued excitement of the same organ), but
by a mental act of reproduction. The simplest ideational image, which
has been described as the primary memory-image, is "the peculiarly vivid
and definite ideal representation of an object which we can maintain or
recall by a suitable effort of attention immediately after perceiving
it" (Stout). For this no external stimulus is required, and as compared
with the after-image it represents the objects in perspective just as
they might be seen in perception. This is characteristic of all mental
images. The essential requisite for this primary image is that the
attention should have been fixed upon the impressions.
The relation between sense-impressions and mental images is a highly
complicated one. Difference in intensity is not a wholly satisfactory
ground of distinction; abnormal physical conditions apart, an image may
have an intensity far greater than that of a sense-given impression. On
the other hand, Hume is certainly right in holding that the distinctive
character of a percept as compared with an image is in all ordinary
cases the force and liveliness with which it strikes the mind--the
distinction, therefore, being one of quality, not of degree. A
distinction of some importance is found in the "superior steadiness"
(Ward) of impressions; while looking at any set of surroundings, images
of many different scenes may pass through the mind, each one of which is
immediately distinguished from the impression of the actual scene before
the eyes. This arises partly, no doubt, from the fact that the
perception has clear localization, which the image has not. In many
cases indeed an image even of a most familiar scene is exceedingly vague
and inaccurate.
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