The Role of Object-Dependent Singular Thought in Visual Cognition

Dissertation, The University of Wisconsin - Madison (1998)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This dissertation investigates various theoretical defenses or explanations which have been provided to the classic philosophic question: what are the objects of perception? Traditionally two general answers have been provided: direct and indirect realism. Direct realists maintain that the objects of perception are external, medium sized material objects. The arguments from illusion and secondary qualities are thought to provide counterexamples to this common sense approach. Indirect realism has grown out of the perceived difficulty posed by illusions and secondary qualities. According to this view the objects of perception are not material objects but rather simple, mind dependent representations. ;Any adequate theoretical defense of a particular type of object which is to serve as the basic object of perception must explain how that object forms the basis of content for all perception. In addition, the defense must justify our belief that vision provides objective knowledge about the world. The first defense of indirect realism I investigate is the so called Lockean veil of perception doctrine. According to this doctrine, visual representations are literally composed of similarity relations between simple completely known representations. The second defense of indirect realism I discuss grows out of Fred Dretske's doctrine of nonepistemic seeing and its accompanying existence condition. Finally I argue that the existence condition is not strong enough to serve as the basis of all perceptual content. I argue that any adequate theory of the objects of perception must involve at least minimal conceptual contact with those objects. Nevertheless the direct realism I defend does not deny the role of purely subjective representation. I advocate using the neo-Fregean notion of object dependent senses to identify the most direct objects of perception. These representations directly relate perceivers to objects without themselves being objects of perception. Further these representations presuppose simple conceptual requirements which must be possessed by all perceivers.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,386

External links

  • This entry has no external links. Add one.
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

The primary objects of perception.David H. Sanford - 1976 - Mind 85 (April):189-208.
Object Perception: Vision and Audition.Casey O’Callaghan - 2008 - Philosophy Compass 3 (4):803-829.
The Situation-Dependency of Perception.Susanna Schellenberg - 2008 - Journal of Philosophy 105 (2):55-84.
Three Grades of Immediate Perception: Thomas Reid’s Distinctions.Todd Buras - 2008 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 76 (3):603–632.
Arguments against direct realism and how to counter them.Pierre le Morvan - 2004 - American Philosophical Quarterly 41 (3):221-234.
Perception and Its Objects.Bill Brewer - 2011 - Oxford, GB: Oxford University Press.
An indirect defense of direct realism.Ryan Hickerson - 2004 - Journal of Mind and Behavior 25 (1):1-6.
Direct realism and perceptual consciousness.Susanna Siegel - 2006 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 73 (2):378-410.
Perceiving empirical objects directly.Robert G. Hudson - 2000 - Erkenntnis 52 (3):357-371.

Analytics

Added to PP
2015-02-05

Downloads
0

6 months
0

Historical graph of downloads

Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references