Re: ASA is what it is and the CA$A engineers do care (Pierre Divenyi )

Subject: Re: ASA is what it is and the CA$A engineers do care
From:    Pierre Divenyi  <marva4!EarLab!pierre(at)UCDAVIS.EDU>
Date:    Fri, 23 May 1997 16:46:50 GMT

Dear List: Well, I think Al did make his view clear regarding the ongoing debate of segregation, binding, features, processes, and problems. I could not agree more with his statement that, before embarking on theorizing on processes, one should better define the problems. But how to define problems other than through experimentation? So, once again, "...verba volant, data manent." (For those who have skipped Latin, the correct saying is "verba volant, scripta manent" but in some science, especially in certain branches of psychology, "scripta" are predominantly "verba"... Sorry, but nobody on the auditory list is being criticized!) I also think that Al's 1991 clear-cut distinction between primitive and schema-driven segregation is on its way into the sunset. In a way, I would be sad if it altogether disappeared (because much of my own experimentation rests on the premises that the top-down processes can be eliminated by exercising some care). But, if awareness is brought in (...what level of awareness?...), the boundary between the two types of segregation becomes very unclear. One more thing: there is one big difference between the distinction A said X while B said Y vs. A said Y while B said X and the Deutsch octave illusion: for the distinction there is a correct or incorrect answer, whereas for the octave illusion there is only an answer. Pierre

This message came from the mail archive
maintained by:
DAn Ellis <>
Electrical Engineering Dept., Columbia University