This article was selected as the article for improvement on 1 July 2013 for a period of one week. |
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Illusion article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article was selected as the article for improvement on 13 November 2017 for a period of one week. |
Shouldn't the various illusions parallel? For instance "Optical", "Aural", and "Kinetical" (as opposed to optical, auditory, and touch). Hyacinth
I would argue that a kinetic illusion and a tactile illusion are two different things. The first relies on one's expectations of how physical objects act upon one another, and the latter relies on fooling the sense of touch. Either way, the English language just doesn't work the way you propose. IanThal 21:13, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
I have made some made some recent changes to this article, but it is still is in rough shape. I will be away for the holiday, but I wanted to outline my thoughts in case anyone wanted to pick this up (or for myself when I return).
This is really my first page so any help, direction, constructive criticism would be great. MiaKarina 13:03, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
Yes this is true, but why you might ask yourself, why? Do you know or is it I that knows, the Wiki master, ahhh... we shall find out! <---whats up with that?
the beginning of the article claims that all human senses can be fooled. I've yet to expirence an illusion of taste/smell. i.e. something salty tasting sweet. it may follow that consumption is the 'truest' of human expirences... Andrew
the mindhacks responses are very good, thank you for that.
I have had "illusions" with touch and taste, so maybe some of you need to be more adventurous.
-Coopol
This page is extremely similar to the " Optical Illusion" page. Most pictures are common to both. Therefore, it should be merged under the name "Illusion." Dewarw 16:36, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
In that picture, a is not the same as b and that is a fact.Get a new picture. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.186.242.58 ( talk) 08:35, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
uuuuuurm..... yes it is! if you isolate both squares and put them on the same coloured background, you will find that both A and B are exactly the same shade. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.194.77.200 ( talk) 19:35, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
nfn dskm j jk v vjn dejb —Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.247.114.165 ( talk) 19:32, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
The article claims, in its first sentence, that illusion is a distortion of the senses. According to Schopenhauer's On the Fourfold Root of the Principle of Sufficient Reason, the sense organs merely supply data to the brain. The senses are not distorted. Their data are merely given, as felt, to the brain. It is the brain's capacity for understanding that distorts the data and conjures up an unusual apprehension of an object. This occurs because the sense data are given in a different, unusual context. The brain's apprehension is then distorted. For example, crossed fingers touching a ball result in the brain's apprehension of two balls. Another example: the sun, usually seen high in the sky, is seen on the horizon in visual proximity to earthly objects and the earth's atmosphere. The brain misapprehends the sun as being large due to the influence of atmospheric perspective and comparison to earthly objects such as trees, buildings, etc. The senses, however, gave all of their data properly and correctly. The phrase "distortion of the senses" seems to mean, mistakenly, that the senses present "perverted," "twisted," incorrect, improper data to the brain. That is not true. The sense organs properly pass sensations to the brain. It is the brain that misinterprets the sensations. Illusions are not distorted sensations. They are misunderstood sensations. Lestrade ( talk) 17:21, 24 January 2010 (UTC)Lestrade
The Ouchi illusion.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Sj ( talk • contribs) 00:34, 16 December 2012
I see no justification for the "Illusion on Rabindranath Tagore" illustration. Illustrations should either be self-explanatory or they should be explained in the text, as to how they relate to the subject. I do not find any of those rules to be conducted! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.189.118.176 ( talk) 21:25, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 16:36, 23 November 2019 (UTC)