HERMANN VON HELMHOLTZ, EWALD HERING AND COLOR VISION: A CONTROVERSY OVER STYLES OF REASONING?

IF 0.2 4区 哲学 0 PHILOSOPHY Manuscrito Pub Date : 2021-03-01 DOI:10.1590/0100-6045.2021.V44N1.JG
Juliana Gutiérrez
{"title":"HERMANN VON HELMHOLTZ, EWALD HERING AND COLOR VISION: A CONTROVERSY OVER STYLES OF REASONING?","authors":"Juliana Gutiérrez","doi":"10.1590/0100-6045.2021.V44N1.JG","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":": During the second half of the 19th century, in the field of physiological optics, there was a strong controversy between Hermann von Helmholtz and Ewald Hering. This controversy has been usually characterized as “empiricism” vs. “nativism”. In the field of physiology of visual perception, several subjects demanded attention, among them, color vision. Helmholtz and Hering suggested different theories for the physiological correlate of color sensation and different color spaces to give an account of the relationships between colors. In this article, I will argue that the controversy between the two authors could be understood as differences between styles of reasoning, and these different styles express different presuppositions. More specifically, I want to suggest that the disagreements could be linked to the discussions on how vital phenomena should be studied.","PeriodicalId":42903,"journal":{"name":"Manuscrito","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2021-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Manuscrito","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1590/0100-6045.2021.V44N1.JG","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

: During the second half of the 19th century, in the field of physiological optics, there was a strong controversy between Hermann von Helmholtz and Ewald Hering. This controversy has been usually characterized as “empiricism” vs. “nativism”. In the field of physiology of visual perception, several subjects demanded attention, among them, color vision. Helmholtz and Hering suggested different theories for the physiological correlate of color sensation and different color spaces to give an account of the relationships between colors. In this article, I will argue that the controversy between the two authors could be understood as differences between styles of reasoning, and these different styles express different presuppositions. More specifically, I want to suggest that the disagreements could be linked to the discussions on how vital phenomena should be studied.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
赫尔曼·冯·亥姆霍兹、埃瓦尔德·赫林与色觉:关于推理方式的争论?
:在19世纪下半叶,在生理光学领域,赫尔曼·冯·亥姆霍兹和埃瓦尔德·赫林之间存在着强烈的争议。这种争论通常被定性为“经验主义”与“本土主义”。在视觉感知生理学领域,有几个学科需要关注,其中包括色觉。Helmholtz和Hering提出了不同的颜色感觉和不同颜色空间的生理相关性理论,以解释颜色之间的关系。在这篇文章中,我认为两位作者之间的争论可以理解为推理风格之间的差异,这些不同的风格表达了不同的预设。更具体地说,我想建议,这些分歧可以与关于如何研究生命现象的讨论联系起来。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Manuscrito
Manuscrito PHILOSOPHY-
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
31
审稿时长
32 weeks
期刊介绍: Information not localized
期刊最新文献
Towards a process-based approach to consciousness and collapse in quantum mechanics “Believing at will is possible”−or is it? Some remarks on Peels’s “truth depends on belief” cases and voluntariness THE STATUS OF ARGUMENTS IN ABSTRACT ARGUMENTATION FRAMEWORKS. A TABLEAUX METHOD ON THE ALLEGED ERROR OF FORMAL OBJECTIONS TO NORMATIVE ERROR THEORY Korsgaard's Expanded Regress Argument
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1