Psychology and philosophy have long reflected on the role of perspective in vision. Since the dawn of modern vision science—roughly, since Helmholtz in the late 1800s—scientific explanations in vision have focused on understanding the computations that transform the sensed retinal image into percepts of the three-dimensional environment. The standard view in the science is that distal properties—viewpoint-independent properties of the environment (object shape) and viewpoint-dependent relational properties (3D orientation relative to the viewer)–are perceptually represented and that properties of the proximal stimulus (in vision, the retinal image) are not. This view is woven into the nature of scientific explanation in perceptual psychology, and has guided impressive advances over the past 150 years. A recently published article suggests that in shape perception, the standard view must be revised. It argues, on the basis of new empirical data, that a new entity—perspectival shape—should be introduced into scientific explanations of shape perception. Specifically, the article’s centrally advertised claim is that, in addition to distal shape, perspectival shape is perceived. We argue that this claim rests on a series of mistakes. Problems in experimental design entail that the article provides no empirical support for any claims regarding either perspective or the perception of shape. There are further problems in scientific reasoning and conceptual development. Detailing these criticisms and explaining how science treats these issues are meant to clarify method and theory, and to improve exchanges between the science and philosophy of perception.

中文翻译：

---

形状、视角以及感知到的和不感知到的东西：对 Morales、Bax 和 Firestone 的评论 (2020)。


心理学和哲学长期以来一直在反思视角在视觉中的作用。自现代视觉科学诞生以来（大致是自 1800 年代末的亥姆霍兹以来），视觉科学解释一直集中于理解将感知到的视网膜图像转换为三维环境感知的计算。科学中的标准观点是，远端属性——与视点无关的环境属性（物体形状）和视点相关的关系属性（相对于观看者的 3D 方向）——以感知方式表示，并且近端刺激的属性（在视觉中） ，视网膜图像）不是。这一观点融入了知觉心理学科学解释的本质，并在过去 150 年中引导了令人瞩目的进步。最近发表的一篇文章表明，在形状感知方面，标准观点必须被修改。它认为，基于新的经验数据，应该将一个新的实体——透视形状——引入到形状感知的科学解释中。具体来说，该文章的主要宣传主张是，除了远端形状之外，还可以感知透视形状。我们认为这种说法是基于一系列错误。实验设计中的问题意味着该文章没有为任何有关透视或形状感知的主张提供经验支持。科学推理和概念发展还存在进一步的问题。详细阐述这些批评并解释科学如何对待这些问题，旨在澄清方法和理论，并促进科学与感知哲学之间的交流。