Inanimate objects sometimes appear endowed with a strange power of sight. A statue notices, a tower watches, the face of an edifice contemplates.
The normal person classifies an object, and then forgets about it. The creative person, by contrast, is always open to new possibilities.
When I see an object there is no will; when its sensations are carried to the brain, there comes the reaction, which says "Do this", or "Do not do this", and this state of the ego-substance is what is called will
I limited myself to introduce a change in my way of thinking and the way I see things. When I look at my child, I do it in a different way then when I'm contemplating a chair. They are different... the child is a living being, and the chair is an object.
I'm never drawing the object itself; I'm only drawing a depiction of the object - a kind of crystallized symbol of it.
I look at every piece of furniture and every object as an individual sculpture.
There is something I feel when I animate something; you can never really understand the character you're animating unless you've had the opportunity to turn it around. Once you've done that, you know it is a three-dimensional object.
Any object not interesting in itself may become interesting through becoming associated with an object in which an interest already exists.
People think how a sugar basin has no physiognomy, no soul. But it changes every day.
Thus the same object may supply a practical perception to one person and a speculative one to another, or the same person may perceive it partly practically and partly speculatively.
The heart of the problem is not so much how we see objects in depth, as how we see the constant layout of the world around us. Space, as such, empty space, is not visible, but surfaces are.
I figured out some basic stuff: that form and colour defines your perception of the nature of an object, whether or not it is intended to.
In real life, that's how we're moving around. We look at things while we're walking and moving and turning around. We stare at objects in the world.
Men are objects to me.
A weird thing is a strange loop, what some of us call 'an object.' Thus it is looked down on by the constructivist spokespeople of anti-art, which is also an anti-products movement - the dominant mode of high art since the inception of the Anthropocene.
For psychological purposes the most important differences in conation are those in virtue of which the object is revealed as sensed or perceived or imaged or remembered or thought.
I wanted to hear sounds of everyday objects - even musical instruments - as things.
Animal vision - including human vision - is so biased toward movement that we don't technically see stationary objects at all.
There has been a great gulf in psychological thought between the perception of space and objects on one hand and the perception of meaning on the other.
Even a part of an object has value. A whole new realism resides in the way one envisages an object or one of its parts.
People look at you and see a product. They don't see a soul. They see an empty hole.
Something similar is still true of the courses followed by manifold intuitions which together make up the unity of one continuous consciousness of one and the same object.
Psychology is still trying to explain the perception of the position of an object in space, along with its shape, size, and so on, and to understand the sensations of color.
Once someone appears to us primarily as an object, kindness has no place to root.
