In Kathleen Akins (ed.), [Book Chapter]. Oxford University Press (1996)
|Abstract||We would all like to have a good theory of perception. Such a theory would account for all the known phenomena and predict novel phenomena, explaining everything in terms of processes occurring in nervous systems in accordance with the principles and laws already established by science: the principles of optics, physics, biochemistry, and the like. Such a theory might come to exist without our ever having to answer the awkward "philosophical" question that arises.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Russell B. Goodman (1974). Is Seeing Believing? Proceedings of the New Mexico-West Texas Philosophical Society 40 (April):45.
Lynne Rudder Baker (1989). On a Causal Theory of Content. Philosophical Perspectives 3:165-186.
Elisabeth Schellekens (2005). Seeing is Believing' and 'Believing is Seeing. Acta Analytica 20 (4):10-23.
Christian Piller (2009). Valuing Knowledge: A Deontological Approach. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 12 (4):413 - 428.
Prasanta S. Bandyopadhyay (1997). On an Inconsistency in Constructive Empiricism. Philosophy of Science 64 (3):511-514.
Zoltán Gendler Szabó (2003). Believing in Things. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 66 (3):584–611.
Margaret Morrison (2006). Emergence, Reduction, and Theoretical Principles: Rethinking Fundamentalism. Philosophy of Science 73 (5):876-887.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads33 ( #36,617 of 549,198 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #63,397 of 549,198 )
How can I increase my downloads?