FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   132   133   134   135   136   137   138   139   140   141   142   143   144   145   146   147   148   149   150   151   152   153   154   155   156  
157   158   159   160   161   162   163   164   165   166   167   168   169   170   171   172   173   174   175   176   177   178   179   180   181   >>   >|  
uggestive of surprise as our daily bread." A stereoscope is an instrument which makes surfaces look solid. All pictures in which perspective and light and shade are properly managed, have more or less of the effect of solidity; but by this instrument that effect is so heightened as to produce an appearance of reality which cheats the senses with its seeming truth. There is good reason to believe that the appreciation of solidity by the eye is purely a matter of education. The famous case of a young man who underwent the operation of couching for cataract, related by Cheselden, and a similar one reported in the Appendix to Mueller's Physiology, go to prove that everything is seen only as a superficial extension, until the other senses have taught the eye to recognize _depth_, or the third dimension, which gives solidity, by converging outlines, distribution of light and shade, change of size, and of the texture of surfaces. Cheselden's patient thought "all objects whatever touched his eyes, as what he felt did his skin." The patient whose case is reported by Mueller could not tell the form of a cube held obliquely before his eye from that of a flat piece of pasteboard presenting the same outline. Each of these patients saw only with one eye,--the other being destroyed, in one case, and not restored to sight until long after the first, in the other case. In two months' time Cheselden's patient had learned to know solids; in fact, he argued so logically from light and shade and perspective that he felt of pictures, expecting to find reliefs and depressions, and was surprised to discover that they were flat surfaces. If these patients had suddenly recovered the sight of _both_ eyes, they would probably have learned to recognize solids more easily and speedily. We can commonly tell whether an object is solid, readily enough with one eye, but still better with two eyes, and sometimes _only_ by using both. If we look at a square piece of ivory with one eye alone, we cannot tell whether it is a scale of veneer, or the side of a cube, or the base of a pyramid, or the end of a prism. But if we now open the other eye, we shall see one or more of its sides, if it have any, and then know it to be a solid, and what kind of a solid. We see something with the second eye which we did not see with the first; in other words, the two eyes see different pictures of the same thing, for the obvious reason that they look from points two
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   132   133   134   135   136   137   138   139   140   141   142   143   144   145   146   147   148   149   150   151   152   153   154   155   156  
157   158   159   160   161   162   163   164   165   166   167   168   169   170   171   172   173   174   175   176   177   178   179   180   181   >>   >|  



Top keywords:
solidity
 

Cheselden

 

patient

 
surfaces
 

pictures

 

reported

 

recognize

 

Mueller

 

learned

 

perspective


effect

 
instrument
 

patients

 
senses
 
reason
 

solids

 

suddenly

 

discover

 

surprised

 

reliefs


argued

 

expecting

 

months

 

logically

 

depressions

 
pyramid
 

obvious

 

points

 

veneer

 

commonly


object

 

readily

 
speedily
 

easily

 

square

 

restored

 

recovered

 

objects

 

appreciation

 

purely


matter
 
education
 

famous

 

couching

 

cataract

 
related
 

operation

 
underwent
 
cheats
 

reality