Helmholtz's Theory of Space and its Significance for Schlick

From Helmholtz to Schlick: The evolution of the sign-theory of perception

“…11 It is this position of Schlick's that has led Heidelberger and Neuber to identify Schlick's philosophy with the Critical Realism of Alois Riehl. (Heidelberger, 2007;Neuber, 2012) But Schlick's conventionalism decisively sets him apart from any Kantian, as noted by Paul Hertz in his comments on Helmholtz' essay on "The Facts Underlying Geometry". (Hertz and Schlick, 1977, p. 59 fn.…”

Hermann von Helmholtz's Empirico-Transcendentalism Reconsidered: Construction and Constitution in Helmholtz's Psychology of the Object

“…That which has no perceptible spatial relation, we conceive as the world of inner intuition, as the world of self-consciousness” (Helmholtz [1878] 1995, 349). As such, the problem of space, for him was inherently related to what we called the problem of difference, and in that sense, Neuber is quite right in arguing that Helmholtz's theory of space was essentially a theory of space perception (Neuber 2012, 168–169). Upon closer analysis the transcendental element in Helmholtz's theory of space is not so much eliminated, as it is shifted to the constitutive role of the possibility of free mobility of rigid bodies (Helmholtz [1870] 1995; Neuber 2012) .…”

“…As such, the problem of space, for him was inherently related to what we called the problem of difference, and in that sense, Neuber is quite right in arguing that Helmholtz's theory of space was essentially a theory of space perception (Neuber 2012, 168-169). Upon closer analysis the transcendental element in Helmholtz's theory of space is not so much eliminated, as it is shifted to the constitutive role of the possibility of free mobility of rigid bodies (Helmholtz [1870Neuber 2012). 36 Specifically within the context of his perceptual theory, Helmholtz stated that:…”

“… 21 For nineteenth-century discussions on the indebtedness of Helmholtz's theorizing to Kant's critical system in general, see Schwertschlager (1883), Krause (1878), Goldschmidt (1898). For more recent analyses, see especially Hatfield (1990), Cahan (1993), Disalle (2006), Schiemann (2009), Meulders (2010), and Neuber (2012). …”