> Technically, the duck-rabbit figure is an ambiguous (or reversible, or bistable) figure, not an illusion > From a constructivist point of view, many illusion

> Technically, the duck-rabbit figure is an ambiguous (or reversible, or bistable) figure, not an illusion > From a constructivist point of view, many illusions illustrate the role of unconscious inferences in perception, while the ambiguous figures illustrate the role of expectations, world-knowledge, and the direction of attention (Long & Toppino, 2004). In my opinion the ambiguous figure is also a form of illusion. The given distinction isn't really valid because our expectations and knowledge are also part of that same unconscious interference that our brain does. One is just a lower-order mechanism and the other a higher order mechanism. But both of those interference happen in the chain of operations between the light hitting our eyeballs and when we consciously 'perceive' it in our minds eye.