Sképsis 12:85-106 (2015)

Eros Carvalho
Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul
The argument from illusion/hallucination have been proposed many times as supporting the strong conclusion that we are always perceiving directly sense-data. In Sense & Sensibilia, Austin argues that this argument is based on a “mass of seductive (mainly verbal) fallacies”. In this paper, I argue that Austin's argumentative moves to deconstruct the argument from illusion is better understood if they are seen as due to his implicit commitment to some disjunctivist conception of perception. His considerations should be taken as a depth discussion about how to conceive perception. If we conceive the perceptual capacity disjunctively, even the weaker conclusion that we sometimes perceive sense-data does not hold. In response to Austin, Ayer claimed that the strong conclusion of the argument from illusion could be sustained by the method of the possibility of error. I argue that this method alone does not sustain that conclusion and the controversy turns back to the conflict between different conceptions of perception. The argument from illusion is philosophically interesting by putting in evidence the problem of how the perceptual capacity should be articulated and conceived. Although matters of fact are relevant to this question, they alone do not decide it.
Keywords the argument from illusion  disjunctivism  perception  John Austin  Jules Ayer
Categories (categorize this paper)
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Translate to english
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

 PhilArchive page | Other versions
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Perceptual Experience: Both Relational and Contentful.John McDowell - 2013 - European Journal of Philosophy 21 (1):144-157.
Tyler Burge on Disjunctivism.John McDowell - 2010 - Philosophical Explorations 13 (3):243-255.
Visual Experiences.J. M. Hinton - 1967 - Mind 76 (April):217-227.
Disjunctivism Again.Tyler Burge - 2011 - Philosophical Explorations 14 (1):43-80.

View all 11 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Austin and Ayer and the Role of Language in Philosophy.Delwin John Graham - 2001 - Dissertation, University of Ottawa (Canada)
Austin and the Argument From Illusion.Roderick Firth - 1964 - Philosophical Review 73 (July):372-382.
Austin on Perception.W. F. R. Hardie - 1963 - Philosophy 38 (July):253-263.
What is Disjunctivism?Michael Thau - 2004 - Philosophical Studies 120 (1-3):193-253.
The Argument From Illusion.Steven L. Reynolds - 2000 - Noûs 34 (4):604-621.
A. J. Ayer on the Argument From Illusion.P. L. McKee - 1973 - Canadian Journal of Philosophy 3 (December):275-280.
Ayer, Austin, and the Argument From Illusion.Robert Winslow Faaborg - 1972 - Dissertation, The University of Iowa
The Argument From the Hand.Peter T. Cash - 1979 - Philosophical Investigations 2 (4):47-70.
The Primacy of Fact Perception.Aaron Allen Schiller - 2012 - Philosophical Psychology 25 (4):575 - 593.
Austin on Some Problems of Perception.Jack Pustilnik - 1965 - Southern Journal of Philosophy 3 (1):18-22.
Probability, Certainty and Illusions.F. A. Siegler - 1962 - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 5 (1-4):91 – 115.


Added to PP index

Total views
609 ( #12,039 of 2,462,269 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
72 ( #10,654 of 2,462,269 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes