The argument from illusion: Objects and objections

Mind 81 (April):191-207 (1972)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The paper's first four sections give a taxonomy and criticism of three classes of objections to the argument from illusion. the last section raises the question whether its main premise does not misclassify perceptual accusatives (e.g. 'sensation of bentness') as individuatives that imply the existence of, say, bent particulars

Links

PhilArchive



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

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

Sight and sense-data.H. V. Stainsby - 1970 - Mind 79 (April):170-187.
Austin and the argument from illusion.Roderick Firth - 1964 - Philosophical Review 73 (July):372-382.
Illusions and sense-data.David H. Sanford - 1981 - Midwest Studies in Philosophy 6 (1):371-385.
Do we perceive physical objects?G. N. Mathrani - 1942 - Philosophical Quarterly (India) 18 (October):175-182.
Defending the argument from illusion.A. R. Greenberg - 1977 - Personalist 58 (April):124-130.
The argument from illusion.William S. Haymond - 1969 - Modern Schoolman 46 (January):109-134.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
102 (#167,348)

6 months
14 (#168,878)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

Imperative content and the painfulness of pain.Manolo Martínez - 2011 - Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences 10 (1):67-90.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references