No such look: problems with the dual content theory

Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences 12 (4):813-833 (2013)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

It is frequently alleged that a round plate viewed from an oblique angle looks elliptical, and that when one tree is in front of another that is the same intrinsic size, the front one looks larger than the rear one. And yet there is also a clear sense in which the plate viewed from an angle looks round, and a clear sense in which the two trees look to be the same size. According to the Dual Content Theory (DCT), what explains these and other similar phenomena is that perceptual experiences present us with two different sorts of spatial properties: intrinsic and perspectival spatial properties. I will argue that the Dual Content Theory is false because it rests on flawed phenomenological descriptions of the experience of spatial properties. The only conditions under which a plate tilted away and an ellipse look alike, or two objects which are different in size look the same size, is when at least one of the objects being compared is misperceived. I will consider several responses to the arguments I present, and conclude by suggesting that abandoning DCT would constitute an improvement upon Noë’s enactive theory of perception

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 92,197

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Comments on Ismael's "double-mindedness: A model for a dual content cognitive architecture?".Brad J. Thompson - 2006 - PSYCHE: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Research On Consciousness 12.
Strong representationalism and centered content.Berit Brogaard - 2010 - Philosophical Studies 151 (3):373 - 392.
Brentano on the dual relation of the mental.Mark Textor - 2013 - Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences 12 (3):465-483.
Depictive seeing and double content.John Dilworth - 2010 - In Catharine Abell & Katerina Bantinaki (ed.), Philosophical Perspectives on Picturing. Oxford University Press.
The Magical Number Two, Plus or Minus: Dual Process Theory as a Theory of Cognitive Kinds.Richard Samuels - 2009 - In Keith Frankish & Jonathan St B. T. Evans (eds.), In Two Minds: Dual Processes and Beyond. Oxford University Press. pp. 129--146.
What narrow content is not.Ned Block - 1991 - In Barry M. Loewer (ed.), Meaning in Mind: Fodor and His Critics. Cambridge: Blackwell.
Minimal semantics.Emma Borg - 2004 - New York: Oxford University Press.
Narrow content and historical accounts: Can Fodor live without them?Kam-Yuen Cheng - 2002 - Journal of Philosophical Research 27:101-113.
Mind-body unity, dual aspect, and the emergence of consciousness.José-Luis Diaz - 2000 - Philosophical Psychology 13 (3):393 – 403.
And what about the chinese?Heike Behrens & Michael Tomasello - 1999 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22 (6):1014-1014.

Analytics

Added to PP
2012-10-12

Downloads
125 (#145,803)

6 months
10 (#275,239)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Walter Hopp
Boston University

Citations of this work

Whither naive realism? - I.Alex Byrne & E. J. Green - 2023 - Philosophical Perspectives (1):1-20.
Gombrich and the Duck-Rabbit.Robert Eamon Briscoe - 2015 - In Michael Beaney, Brendan Harrington & Dominic Shaw (eds.), Aspect Perception After Wittgenstein: Seeing-as and Novelty. New York: Routledge. pp. 49-88.

View all 11 citations / Add more citations

References found in this work

Philosophical Investigations.Ludwig Wittgenstein - 1953 - New York, NY, USA: Wiley-Blackwell. Edited by G. E. M. Anscombe.
Phenomenology of perception.Maurice Merleau-Ponty - 1945 - Atlantic Highlands, New Jersey: The Humanities Press. Edited by Donald A. Landes.
Phenomenology of Perception.Maurice Merleau-Ponty - 1945 - New York: Routledge. Edited by Donald A. Landes.
Action in Perception.Alva Noë - 2004 - MIT Press.
A treatise of human nature.David Hume & D. G. C. Macnabb (eds.) - 1978 - New York: Oxford University Press.

View all 33 references / Add more references