Cognitive Science 33 (6):1036–1058 (2009)

Malika Auvray
Institut Des Systèmes Intelligents Et Robotique, Paris
Sensory substitution devices provide through an unusual sensory modality (the substituting modality, e.g., audition) access to features of the world that are normally accessed through another sensory modality (the substituted modality, e.g., vision). In this article, we address the question of which sensory modality the acquired perception belongs to. We have recourse to the four traditional criteria that have been used to define sensory modalities: sensory organ, stimuli, properties, and qualitative experience (Grice, 1962), to which we have added the criteria of behavioral equivalence (Morgan, 1977), dedication (Keeley, 2002), and sensorimotor equivalence (O’Regan & Noe¨, 2001). We discuss which of them are fulfilled by perception through sensory substitution devices and whether this favors the view that perception belongs to the substituting or to the substituted modality. Though the application of a number of criteria might be taken to point to the conclusion that perception with a sensory substitution device belongs to the substituted modality, we argue that the evidence leads to an alternative view on sensory substitution. According to this view, the experience after sensory substitution is a transformation, extension, or augmentation of our perceptual capacities, rather than being something equivalent or reducible to an already existing sensory modality. We develop this view by comparing sensory substitution devices to other ‘‘mind-enhancing tools’’ such as pen and paper, sketchpads, or calculators. An analysis of sensory substitution in terms of mind-enhancing tools unveils it as a thoroughly transforming perceptual experience and as giving rise to a novel form of perceptual interaction with the environment.
Keywords Sensory substitution  Sensory modalities  Neural plasticity
Categories No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1111/j.1551-6709.2009.01040.x
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 59,775
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Action in Perception.Alva Noë - 2005 - MIT Press.
What is It Like to Be a Bat?Thomas Nagel - 1974 - Philosophical Review 83 (October):435-50.

View all 37 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

View all 19 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Is There a Space of Sensory Modalities?Richard Gray - 2013 - Erkenntnis 78 (6):1259-1273.
Descartes on the Cognitive Structure of Sensory Experience.Alison Simmons - 2003 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 67 (3):549–579.
A Sensorimotor Account of Vision and Visual Consciousness.J. Kevin O’Regan & Alva Noë - 2001 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 24 (5):883-917.
Sensory Qualities, Sensible Qualities, Sensational Qualities.Alex Byrne - 2009 - In Brian McLaughlin, Ansgar Beckermann & Sven Walter (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Mind. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Sensory Phenomenology and Perceptual Content.Boyd Millar - 2011 - Philosophical Quarterly 61 (244):558-576.
Inner-Sense.Vincent Picciuto & Peter Carruthers - forthcoming - In Biggs S., Matthen M. & Stokes D. (eds.), Perception and its Modalites. Oxford University Press.


Added to PP index

Total views
146 ( #69,300 of 2,432,668 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
4 ( #170,105 of 2,432,668 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes