Philosophy 58 (January):57-72 (1983)
AbstractThe inspectability of after-images has been denied. A typical claim is Ilham Dilman's: ‘I cannot say my apprehension of the after-image I see has changed but not the after-image itself’, for, he says, appearance and reality are one as regards the after-image. His reason is that this is a logical consequence of the fact that other people have no possible basis for correcting what I say about the after-image I see
Similar books and articles
The Manifest Image and the Scientific Image.Bas C. van Fraassen - 1999 - In Diederik Aerts, Jan Broekaert & Ernest Mathijs (eds.), Einstein Meets Magritte: An Interdisciplinary Reflection. Kluwer Academic Publishers. pp. 29-52.
Images of reflection: on the meanings of the word reflection in different learning contexts. [REVIEW]Adrian Ratkic - 2013 - AI and Society 28 (3):339-349.
Image manipulation as research misconduct.Debra Parrish & Bridget Noonan - 2009 - Science and Engineering Ethics 15 (2):161-167.
Dennett, mental images and images in context.Lilly-Marlene Russow - 1985 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 45 (June):581-94.
Flashforward: The Future is Now.Patricia Pisters - 2011 - Deleuze and Guatarri Studies 5 (Suppl):98-115.
Added to PP
Historical graph of downloads
Citations of this work
Afterimages and Sensation.Ian Phillips - 2013 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 87 (2):417-453.
Transparency and Representationalist Theories of Consciousness.Amy Kind - 2010 - Philosophy Compass 5 (10):902-913.
Requiem for the identity theory.J. R. Smythies - 1994 - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 37 (3):311-29.
New representationalism.Edmond Wright - 1990 - Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour 20 (1):65-92.
References found in this work
No references found.