Skip to content
Carmelics
Topics
Thinkers
Changes
Contributors
Loading account…
Statements
321,452
Perspectives
108,905
Topics
42
Home
/
Original
/
inverse
See Original
Inverse View
It is not the case that Direct realist epistemologies, defended by Reid, Moore, and Pryor, ground knowledge of mind-independent objects in non-inferential perceptual warrant.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
1 perspective
Reason for
?
1.
Perceptual illusions and hallucinations show perception can misrepresent; this undermines claims of direct, non-inferential warrant.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Cognitive psychology demonstrates perception involves extensive unconscious inference; 'non-inferential' warrant is theoretically incoherent.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Direct realism cannot explain how the same proximal stimulus produces different perceptions across individuals and contexts.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
Perceptual experience has intrinsic presentational content that makes objects appear directly to consciousness without inference.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Foundationalism requires some non-inferential warranted beliefs; perceptual knowledge provides the most plausible candidate.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
The alternatives (idealism, skepticism, representationalism) create more philosophical problems than direct realism solves.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Next step
Based on where you are in your exploration
Strongest counterpoint
Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.