Philosophical Review 107 (2):332 (1998)

Nancy Kendrick
Wheaton College, Massachusetts
This book does several things, and it does them all well. Yolton firmly contextualizes the debates about perception within the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, while showing how these debates are often repeated in contemporary philosophy of mind. Along the way, he provides novel interpretations of Descartes, Locke, Berkeley, Hume, and Kant that are clearly and convincingly presented. Perhaps the most important feature of his treatment is that it so vividly shows the Moderns grappling with issues about perception that continue to plague us. The uniting theme of the work is Yolton’s insistence that direct realism and representationalism are compatible. Yolton’s defense of direct realism is largely motivated by the thesis that many philosophers incorrectly take a representational theory of mind to necessitate indirect realism. This mistake arises, according to Yolton, because they suppose that the representations themselves become the objects of perception and therefore stand between the perceiver and the world of objects. Yolton’s argument that the philosophers of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries were struggling to establish two interactive relations between perceivers and the physical world underlies his compatibility thesis: There is a physical and causal relationship and, more importantly, there is what Yolton calls a “cognitive” or “semantic” relationship. The latter relationship holds the key to the compatibility of representationalism with direct realism.
Keywords Analytic Philosophy  Contemporary Philosophy  General Interest
Categories (categorize this paper)
ISBN(s) 0031-8108
DOI 10.2307/2998502
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 69,979
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

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

The Tripartite Model of Representation.Peter Slezak - 2002 - Philosophical Psychology 15 (3):239-270.
Descartes and the Aristotelian Framework of Sensory Perception1.Joseph W. Hwang - 2011 - Midwest Studies in Philosophy 35 (1):111-148.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Perception and Reality: A History From Descartes to Kant.John W. Yolton - 1998 - Philosophical Quarterly 48 (193):540-542.
Subjectivity in Descartes and Kant.Hubert Schwyzer - 1997 - Philosophical Quarterly 47 (188):342-357.
Two Charges of Intellectualism Against Kant.Arthur Melnick - 2013 - Kantian Review 18 (2):197-219.
Clear and Distinct Perception in Descartes's Philosophy.Shoshana Smith - 2005 - Dissertation, University of California Berkeley
Is More Objective Reality Really Something More?Anthony Dardis - 2002 - History of Philosophy & Logical Analysis 5.
Descartes em Kant.Luciano Codato - 2009 - Discurso 39 (39):195-222.
Natural Geometry in Descartes and Kepler.Gary Hatfield - 2015 - Res Philosophica 92 (1):117-148.
Images and Kant’s Theory of Perception.Samantha Matherne - 2015 - Ergo: An Open Access Journal of Philosophy 2.
Manifest Reality: Kant's Idealism and His Realism. [REVIEW]Andrew Stephenson - 2016 - British Journal for the History of Philosophy 24 (6):1220-1223.


Added to PP index

Total views
8 ( #1,006,008 of 2,505,139 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #416,587 of 2,505,139 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes