Seeing is believing--or is it?

In Kathleen Akins (ed.), [Book Chapter]. Oxford University Press. pp. 158-172 (1996)
Abstract
We would all like to have a good theory of perception. Such a theory would account for all the known phenomena and predict novel phenomena, explaining everything in terms of processes occurring in nervous systems in accordance with the principles and laws already established by science: the principles of optics, physics, biochemistry, and the like. Such a theory might come to exist without our ever having to answer the awkward "philosophical" question that arises.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
Options
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history
Request removal from index
Download options
Our Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 27,195
Through your library
References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles
Is Seeing Believing?Russell B. Goodman - 1974 - Proceedings of the New Mexico-West Texas Philosophical Society 40 (April):45.
On a Causal Theory of Content.Lynne Rudder Baker - 1989 - Philosophical Perspectives 3:165-186.
Believing in Things.Zoltán Gendler Szabó - 2003 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 66 (3):584–611.

Monthly downloads

Added to index

2009-01-28

Total downloads

89 ( #57,810 of 2,163,972 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

8 ( #39,854 of 2,163,972 )

How can I increase my downloads?

My notes
Sign in to use this feature


Discussion
Order:
There  are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.

Other forums