In Routledge Handbook on Molyneux's Question. London: Routledge (forthcoming)

Authors
Mohan Matthen
University of Toronto, Mississauga
Jonathan Cohen
University of California, San Diego
Abstract
Molyneux asked whether a newly sighted person could distinguish a sphere from a cube by sight alone, given that she was antecedently able to do so by touch. This, we contend, is a question about general ideas. To answer it, we must ask (a) whether spatial locations identified by touch can be identified also by sight, and (b) whether the integration of spatial locations into an idea of shape persists through changes of modality. Posed this way, Molyneux’s Question goes substantially beyond question (a), about spatial locations, alone; for a positive answer to (a) leaves open whether a perceiver might cross-identify locations, but not be able to identify the shapes that collections of locations comprise. We further emphasize that MQ targets general ideas so as to distinguish it from corresponding questions about experiences of shape and about the property of tangible (vs. visual) shape. After proposing a generalized formulation of MQ, we extend earlier work (“Many Molyneux Questions,” Australasian Journal of Philosophy 2020) by showing that MQ does not admit a single answer across the board. Some integrative data-processes transfer across modalities; others do not. Seeing where and how such transfer succeeds and fails in individual cases has much to offer to our understanding of perception and its modalities.
Keywords Multimodal perception  Molyneux's Question  General ideas  Spatial perception  Shape perception  Affective perception
Categories (categorize this paper)
Buy the book Find it on Amazon.com
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

 PhilArchive page | Other versions
External links

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

Looking at Upside-Down Faces.Robert K. Yin - 1969 - Journal of Experimental Psychology 81 (1):141.
Reasons and Theories of Sensory Affect.Murat Aydede & Matthew Fulkerson - 2019 - In David Bain, Michael Brady & Jennifer Corns (eds.), The Philosophy of Pain: Unpleasantness, Emotion, and Deviance. New York, USA: Routledge. pp. 27-59.
Evaluative Perception: Introduction.Anna Bergqvist & Robert Cowan - 2018 - In Anna Bergqvist & Robert Cowan (eds.), Evaluative Perception. Oxford University Press.
Evaluative Perception: Introduction.Anna Bergqvist & Robert Cowan (eds.) - 2018 - Oxford: Oxford University Press.

View all 7 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Molyneux’s Question and the Amodality of Spatial Experience.Janet Levin - 2018 - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 61 (5-6):590-610.
Molyneux's Questions.Peter Baumann - 2004 - In Ralph Schumacher (ed.), Perception and Reality. mentis. pp. 168-187.
Do Things Look the Way They Feel?John Schwenkler - 2013 - Analysis 73 (1):86-96.
Locke on the Role of Judgment in Perception.Walter Ott - 2020 - European Journal of Philosophy 28 (3):670-684.
Leibniz on Molyneux's Question.Brian Glenney - 2012 - History of Philosophy Quarterly 29 (3):247-264.
Many Molyneux Questions.Mohan Matthen & Jonathan Cohen - 2020 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 98 (1):47-63.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2020-03-12

Total views
130 ( #78,206 of 2,432,332 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
26 ( #30,200 of 2,432,332 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes