American Philosophical Quarterly 19 (January):83-92 (1982)
|Abstract||While there is virtually a consensus among contemporary philosophers of perception that some form of direct realism is true, there is less than complete agreement about whether normal, direct perceptions involve mental inferences in any sense. In taking another look at this recurrent question, my aim is twofold: first, to examine some of the arguments and evidences that have been offered in favor of inferences and to see if they can be accommodated within the direct realist framework, and second, to attempt to clarify and defend the insight of direct realism that normal perceptions are noninferential|
|Keywords||Cognition Epistemology Inference Perception Psychology Realism|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Harold I. Brown (1992). Direct Realism, Indirect Realism, and Epistemology. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 52 (2):341-363.
J. R. Smythies & Vilayanur S. Ramachandran (1997). An Empirical Refutation of the Direct Realist Theory of Perception. Inquiry 40 (4):437-438.
Pierre le Morvan (2004). Arguments Against Direct Realism and How to Counter Them. American Philosophical Quarterly 41 (3):221-234.
Anthony Chemero (2003). An Outline of a Theory of Affordances. Ecological Psychology 15 (2):181-195.
Douglas J. McDermid (2001). What is Direct Perceptual Knowledge? A Fivefold Confusion. Grazer Philosophische Studien 62 (1):1-16.
Moltke S. Gram (1983). Direct Realism: A Study Of Perception. Boston: Nijhoff.
Lawrence Richard Carleton (1978). Toward a Defense of Direct Realism. Auslegung 5 (February):101-111.
Michael Huemer (2001). Skepticism and the Veil of Perception. Lanham: Rowman &Amp; Littlefield.
N. M. L. Nathan (2005). Direct Realism: Proximate Causation and the Missing Object. [REVIEW] Acta Analytica 20 (36):3-6.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads16 ( #81,717 of 722,826 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #60,541 of 722,826 )
How can I increase my downloads?