Inquiry 10 (1-4):225 – 244 (1967)
|Abstract||Philosophers have given various reasons for denying the existence of sense data. A number of these reasons are examined in the present paper. The claim that ?no sufficient purpose is served by positing such objects? is deemed irrelevant to the issue; the complaint that ?we do not know what it would be like to find that there were no such objects? is found to be confusedly formulated, mistaken, and irrelevant; and the charge that there is something improper, extraordinary, or defective about the way in which philosophers have introduced the term ?sense datum? into their discourse is pronounced false|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Norman O. Brown (1957). Sense-Data and Material Objects. Mind 66 (April):173-194.
G. E. Davie (1954). Common Sense and Sense-Data. Philosophical Quarterly 4 (July):229-246.
Paul Coates, Sense-Data. Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
José Luis Bermúdez (2000). Naturalized Sense Data. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 61 (2):353 - 374.
Manuel Garcia-Carpintero (2001). Sense Data: The Sensible Approach. Grazer Philosophische Studien 62 (1):17-63.
David H. Sanford (1981). Illusions and Sense-Data. Midwest Studies in Philosophy 6 (1):371-385.
Timothy L. S. Sprigge (1966). The Common‐Sense View of Physical Objects. Inquiry 9 (1-4):339-373.
Nikolay Milkov (2001). The History or Russell's Concepts 'Sense-Data' and 'Knowledge by Acquaintance'. Archiv Fuer Begriffsgeschichte 43:221-231.
Michael Huemer, Sense-Data. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
Added to index2009-02-04
Total downloads1 ( #291,386 of 722,813 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #60,541 of 722,813 )
How can I increase my downloads?