[accessibleimage] Molyneaux's question rephrased

Hi,
Following are some questions I have about touch and sight. Would appreciate any feedback, thoughts

In the paper "Recovery from Early Blindness" by Richard Gregory he describes a man, S.B, gaining vision at the age of 51. Shortly after the operation he draws pictures from what Gregory calls "touch memory" and is able to understand objects through vision alone and not touching them, though they are objects he has known from touch when blind (clock on wall and written letters). This again touch memory. In his pictures though he does not enter features which he "had not known previously by touch".

This seems to answer differently than John Locke's answer to Molyneaux

However S.B had difficulty recognizing faces and facial expressions. This is also the case for Michael May (blind and regained sight) that he has difficulty with understanding faces and facial expressions. I was thinking that perhaps the explanation to this is that facial expressions, body language are something done "on the fly", there is movement involved and this is something one can not experience with touch. Transition of expression involves movement.

In lieu of this would it not seem fair to rephrase Molyneaux problem to:

"If a blind person gains sight will that person, soon after gaining sight, understand an object from sight alone not having experienced it by touch from before?"

and/or Could this be compared to an archaeologist who uncovers an object and doesn't know what it is? 

The idea being that touch is very important for sight

Is perhaps sight the "servant" of touch? That sight discovers things for us to touch? The original object of development is to touch and verify? Is sight the ability to "touch" at a distance? That sight develops from touch? Sight developed to be able to touch farther away then the lengths of our arms?

Thanks,
Lisa


http://www.richardgregory.org/

Other related posts: