Tag Archives: perception

THE REFUTATION OF INTENTIONALISM (pages 353-386)

Daniele BERTINI ABSTRACT: My purpose is to refute the intentionalist approach to perception. Drawing from mainstream literature, I identify a principle on which any version of intentional theory relies. My paper is a detailed attack on the truth of the principle. In the first section I will introduce terminology and will taxonomize various statements of the intentional view. In the …

Read More »

E = K AND NON-EPISTEMIC PERCEPTION (pages 307-331)

Frank HOFMANN ABSTRACT: Quite plausibly, epistemic justification and rationality is tied to possession of evidence. According to Williamson, one’s evidence is what one knows. This is not compatible with non-epistemic perception, however, since non-epistemic perception does not require belief in what one perceives and, thus, does not require knowledge of the evidence – and, standardly, knowledge does require belief. If one …

Read More »

AGAINST SENSE-DATA AS STRUCTURED UNIVERSALS (pages 359-363)

Landon D. C. ELKIND ABSTRACT: I critically discuss a new proposal for a metaphysics of sense-data. This proposal is due to Peter Forrest. Forrest argues that, if we accept Platonism about universals, sense-data are best understood as structured universals–in particular, as structured universals with temporal and spatial properties as components. Against this proposal, I argue sense-data as structured universals are …

Read More »

TRACKING INFERENCES IS NOT ENOUGH: THE GIVEN AS TIE-BREAKER (pages 129-135)

Marc CHAMPAGNE ABSTRACT: Most inferentialists hope to bypass givenness by tracking the conditionals claimants are implicitly committed to. I argue that this approach is underdetermined because one can always construct parallel trees of conditionals. I illustrate this using the Müller-Lyer illusion and touching a table. In the former case, the lines are either even or uneven; in the latter case, a …

Read More »

SUPPOSITIONAL REASONING AND PERCEPTUAL JUSTIFICATION (pages 215-219)

Stewart COHEN ABSTRACT: James Van Cleve raises some objections to my attempt to solve the bootstrapping problem for what I call “basic justification theories.” I argue that given 1 the inference rules endorsed by basic justification theorists, we are a priori (propositionally) justified in believing that perception is reliable. This blocks the bootstrapping result. Download PDF

Read More »