1. Look at the first few visual examples in Illusions and Paradoxes by Zamora. What model of the mind-brain seems closest to reality based on just these examples? Argue that there are or are not indications of multiple models among the illusions. (Do not discuss them all; choose a couple that strike you most powerfully.)
2. Is reading a new article a bottom-up or top-down process? Provide opinion and justification for your response.
Look at the first few visual examples in Illusions and Paradoxes by Zamora. What model of the mind-brain seems closest to reality based on just these examples? Argue that there are or are not indications of multiple models among the illusions. (Do not discuss them all; choose a couple that strike you most powerfully.)
I can only assume you're referring to Antonio Zamora's website here: http://www.scientificpsychic.com/graphics/index.html. If not, then I don't know to what work or site you are referring to.
"Three Streams" This one is interesting because it seems to simulate motion. The basic theory is that our eyes scan the picture, and, as a result, there are "aftereffects" of one area that get carried over into another. Another good one is the "Gears" example, which can be found anywhere. In both motion examples, the neuroscientific concept is that neural pathways in the brain that normally register motion are also activated by things that might suggest motion (like circularity).
Warped squares is what is called a shape distortion illusion. There are many of these. Yet, the concept is the same: if we look at the squares, we see curved and bulging features. They are not present. What happens is that the squares, perfectly straight in reality, take on the dimensions of its neighboring objects.
Color illusions never fail. One common one from Zamora's site is "Checkerboard with shadow." the neuroscientifric concept here seems to be that when one colored object is placed next to another, they will have opposing effects. In other words, a gray square, in this example, when placed next to a lighter object, will appear darker than the reverse (cf Zamora, 2013).
The basic theory here is neuroscientific. There is a gap between objective reality and our subjective expectations. All illusions are based on this general principle. Color illusions, for example, are common. They show (like Zamora's red x) that the brain does not look at color of itself - it looks at color relative to its surroundings. The implications here are tremendous, since it seems to prove that our vision and perception is holistic, not individual (Friedenberg, 2006). ...
Visual examples of illusions are determined.