La crítica contemporánea ha mostrado el contraste entre la teoría de la visión expuesta en los libros I y III de Meteorológicos y el resto de obras mayores del corpus aristotelicum. En este artículo presentamos una clasifi cación de las principales interpretaciones arrojadas sobre esta irregularidad. Finalmente, propondremos una exégesis de estos pasajes acorde con la teoría estándar establecida por Aristóteles en las obras psicológicas.

Resumen: La “visión escotópica” desarrollada por Aristóteles en De Anima II 7 es la primera formulación sistemática de este fenómeno clave para las actuales neurociencias. En la teoría aristotélica surge una aparente contradicción entre el “compromiso ontológico” de la oscuridad como privación y el “realismo gnoseológico” que considera visible esa misma oscuridad. Tomás de Aquino en su Sententia libri De Anima propone una interpretación que establece la relación analógica entre luz y oscuridad a través del color. Esta estrategia permite disolver (...) cualquier contrariedad y establecer una percepción visual de la oscuridad en sentido realista.: The “scotopic vision” developed by Aristotle in De Anima II 7 is the first systematic formulation of this key phenomenon for current neurosciences. In this theory an apparent contradiction arises between the “ontological commitment” of darkness as deprivation and the “gnoseological realism” that considers that same darkness visible. Tomás de Aquino in his Sententia libri De Anima proposes an interpretation that establishes the analogical relationship between light and darkness through color. This strategy allows to dissolve any annoyance and establish a visual perception of darkness in a realistic. (shrink)

Aristotle famously claimed that we perceive that we see or hear, and that this metaperception necessarily accompanies all conscious sensory experiences. In this essay I compare Aristotle’s account of metaperception with three main models of self-awareness to be found in the contemporary literature. The first model countenances introspection or inner sense as higher-order perception. The second model rejects introspection altogether, and maintains that judgments that we see or hear can be directly extracted from the first-order experience, using a procedure sometimes (...) called “an ascent routine.” The third model insists that the first-order experience has a twofold intentional structure: it is directed both at the perceived external object and at itself, i.e., reflexively. Although Aristotle’s own account is certainly closer to the third model (as Brentano rightly observed), the latter does not exhaust Aristotle’s insights on metaperception. One function of the common sense in Aristotle’s theory of perception is apparently to monitor the activity of our sensory modalities, and to make us aware that we see or hear independently of the sensory contents of our experience. I shall suggest that the monitoring function of perception is best understood in relation with contemporary cognitive science research on metacognition. Common sense is or involves a metaperceptual practical ability distinct from both object level sensory perception and metarepresentational knowledge about our senses. (shrink)