Elusive Objects

Do we directly perceive physical objects? What is the significance of the qualification ‘directly’ here? Austin famously denied that there was a unique interpretation by which we could make sense of the traditional debate in the philosophy of perception. I look here at Thompson Clarke's discussion of GE Moore and surface perception to answer Austin’s scepticism

Family and Marriage: Institutions and the Need for Social Goods

Institutions, if unjust, ought to be reformed or even abolished. This radical Rawlsian thought leads to the question of whether the family ought to be abolished, given its negative impact on the very possibility of delivering equality of life chances. In this article, we address questions regarding the justice of the family, and of marriage, and reflect on rights, equality, and the provision of social goods by institutions. There is a temptation to justify our social institutions in terms which highlight their universal accessibility and benefits. But we may best understand the claim of some of our most important institutions where we recognize that they are forms of social good which may legitimately benefit some without having to benefit all. Their abolition is unjustified where there is sufficient value in them given our collective needs that it is unreasonable for some to refuse the means to maintain and promote these goods

Rethinking naive realism

Perceptions are externally-directed - they present us with a mind-independent reality, and thus contribute to our abilities to think about this reality, and to know what is objectively the case. But perceptions are also internally-dependent - their phenomenal characters depend on the neuro-computational properties of the subject. A good theory of perception must account for both these facts. But Naive realism has been criticized for failing to accommodate the latter one. This paper evaluates and responds to this criticism. It first argues that a certain version of naive realism, often called “selectionism”, does indeed struggle with the internal-dependence of perceptions. It then develops an alternate version of naive realism which does not. This alternate version, inspired by an idea of Martin's, accommodates the internal-dependence of perceptions by recognizing the role that the subject's neuro-computational properties play in shaping perceptual phenomenology. At the same time, it retains the distinctive naive realist account of the external-directedness of perceptions

Telepresence and the Role of the Senses

The telepresence experience can be evoked in a number of ways. A well-known example is a player of videogames who reports about a telepresence experience, a subjective experience of being in one place or environment, even when physically situated in another place. In this paper we set the phenomenon of telepresence into a theoretical framework. As people react subjectively to stimuli from telepresence, empirical studies can give more evidence about the phenomenon. Thus, our contribution is to bridge the theoretical with the empirical. We discuss theories of perception with an emphasis on Heidegger, Merleau-Ponty and Gibson, the role of the senses and the Spinozian belief procedure. The aim is to contribute to our understanding of this phenomenon. A telepresence-study that included the affordance concept is used to empirically study how players report sense-reactions to virtual sightseeing in two cities. We investigate and explore the interplay of the philosophical and the empirical. The findings indicate that it is not only the visual sense that plays a role in this experience, but all senses

Recollection, perception, imagination

Remembering a cat sleeping (specifically, recollecting the way the cat looked), perceiving (specifically, seeing) a cat sleeping, and imagining (specifically, visualizing) a cat sleeping are of course importantly different. Nonetheless, from the first-person perspective they are palpably alike. Our first question is: Q1 What are these similarities (and differences)? The question can equally well be asked about other modalities—a purring cat could be substituted for a sleeping one, for example. But the chief examples will be visual. Despite the similarities between remembering, seeing, and imagining, one can readily distinguish them in one’s own case. When one sees a cat sleeping, one is often in a position to know that one sees a cat sleeping. (Or, at least, to know that one sees something, which perhaps unbeknownst to one is a cat sleeping.) In ordinary cases, there is no danger of confusing vision with recollection or imagination. Although confusion between recollection and imagination is more likely, it is not pervasive: usually there is little difficulty in knowing that one is recalling a cat sleeping, not (merely) visualizing a cat sleeping. 1 Our second question concerns this latter fact: Q2 How does one tell that one is recalling (and so not perceiving or imagining)? “By introspection ” is no doubt a correct answer, if ‘introspection ’ is taken as a label for that special first-person method—whatever it is—that delivers knowledge of one’s mental life. Correct, but hardly illuminating. Of course, there are versions of Q2 for perceiving and imagining, with equally unobvious substantive answers. The version of Q2 for perception will be addressed en route to answering the version for recollection. 1 Seeming to recall is an important category, but space precludes the discussion it deserves.

Magnitude, precision, and realism of depth perception in stereoscopic vision

Our perception of depth is substantially enhanced by the fact that we have binocular vision. This provides us with more precise and accurate estimates of depth and an improved qualitative appreciation of the three-dimensional (3D) shapes and positions of objects. We assessed the link between these quantitative and qualitative aspects of 3D vision. Specifically, we wished to determine whether the realism of apparent depth from binocular cues is associated with the magnitude or precision of perceived depth and the degree of binocular fusion. We presented participants with stereograms containing randomly positioned circles and measured how the magnitude, realism, and precision of depth perception varied with the size of the disparities presented. We found that as the size of the disparity increased, the magnitude of perceived depth increased, while the precision with which observers could make depth discrimination judgments decreased. Beyond an initial increase, depth realism decreased with increasing disparity magnitude. This decrease occurred well below the disparity limit required to ensure comfortable viewing