Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 72 (2):179-200 (1998)
|Abstract||I argue against a Disjunctive approach to visual experience. I then critique three 'common-factor' views: Qualia Theory, Intentionalism and Sense-Date Theory. The latter two are combined to form Intentional Trope Theory; and that view is defended|
|Keywords||Epistemology Experience Metaphysics Qualia Visual|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Andy Clark (2001). Visual Experience and Motor Action: Are the Bonds Too Tight? Philosophical Review 110 (4):495-519.
Robert Schroer (2012). Representationalism and the Scene-Immediacy of Visual Experience: A Journey to the Fringe and Back. Philosophical Psychology 25 (4):595 - 615.
Paul Coates (2004). Wilfrid Sellars, Perceptual Consciousness, and Theory of Attention. Essays in Philosophy 5 (1):1-25.
Sean Wilkie (1995). Searle's Theory of Visual Experience. Philosophical Quarterly 45 (178):70-78.
Thomas Natsoulas (1989). The Distinction Between Visual Perceiving and Visual Perceptual Experience. Journal of Mind and Behavior 10:37-61.
Clare Batty (2010). Scents and Sensibilia. American Philosophical Quarterly 47 (2):103-118.
Tim Crane (2000). Introspection, Intentionality, and the Transparency of Experience. Philosophical Topics 28 (2):49-67.
John O'Dea (2008). Transparency and the Unity of Experience. In E. Wright (ed.), The Case for Qualia. MIT Press.
Michael Tye (2009). The Admissible Contents of Visual Experience. Philosophical Quarterly 59 (236):541-562.
Michael Tye (1992). Visual Qualia and Visual Content. In Tim Crane (ed.), The Contents of Experience. Cambridge University Press.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads62 ( #18,269 of 722,813 )
Recent downloads (6 months)4 ( #20,384 of 722,813 )
How can I increase my downloads?