Putting the brakes on enactive perception
David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Psyche 12 (1) (2006)
Alva Noë’s _Action in Perception _offers a provocative and vigorous defense of the thesis that vision is enactive: visual experience depends on dispositional motor responses. On this view, vision and action are inextricably bound. In this review, I argue against enactive perception. I raise objections to seven lines of evidence that appear in Noë’s book, and I indicate some reasons for thinking that vision can operate independently of motor responses. I conclude that the relationship between vision and action is causal, not constitutive. I then address three other contentious hypotheses in the book. Noë argues that visual states are not pictorial; he argues that all perception is conceptual; and he argues that the external world makes a constitutive contribution to experience. I am unpersuaded by these arguments, and I offer reasons to resist Noë’s conclusions
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
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.
Citations of this work BETA
Dustin Stokes (2013). Cognitive Penetrability of Perception. Philosophy Compass 8 (7):646-663.
Mirko Farina (2013). Neither Touch nor Vision: Sensory Substitution as Artificial Synaesthesia? Biology and Philosophy 28 (4):639-655.
Timothy Lane (2012). Toward an Explanatory Framework for Mental Ownership. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences 11 (2):251-286.
Malika Auvray & Erik Myin (2009). Perception With Compensatory Devices: From Sensory Substitution to Sensorimotor Extension. Cognitive Science 33 (6):1036–1058.
Helena de Preester (2011). Technology and the Body: The (Im)Possibilities of Re-Embodiment. [REVIEW] Foundations of Science 16 (2):119-137.
Similar books and articles
Paul Coates (2007). Experience, Action and Representations: Critical Realism and the Enactive Theory of Vision. [REVIEW] Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences 6 (4):445-462.
Mohan Matthen (2006). Review: Action in Perception. [REVIEW] Mind 115 (460):1160-1166.
Kristjan Laasik (2011). On Perceptual Presence. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences 10 (4):439-459.
Alessandra Tanesini & Richard Gray (2010). Perception and Action: The Taste Test. Philosophical Quarterly 60 (241):718-734.
Evan Thompson & Giovanna Colombetti (2005). Enacting Emotional Interpretations with Feeling. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 28 (2):200-201.
Shaun Gallagher (2005). Review of Alva Noë's Action in Perception. [REVIEW] Times Literary Supplement.
Nivedita Gangopadhyay & Julian Kiverstein (2009). Enactivism and the Unity of Perception and Action. Topoi 28 (1):63-73.
Robert Briscoe (2008). Vision, Action, and Make‐Perceive. Mind and Language 23 (4):457-497.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads865 ( #584 of 1,911,681 )
Recent downloads (6 months)152 ( #1,187 of 1,911,681 )
How can I increase my downloads?