Content, Object, and Phenomenal Character

Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
The view that perceptual experience has representational content, or the content view, has recently been criticized by the defenders of the so-called object view. Part of the dispute, I claim here, is based on a lack of grasp of the notion of content. There is, however, a core of substantial disagreement. Once the substantial core is revealed, I aim to: (1) reject the arguments raised against the content view by Campbell (2002), Travis (2004), and Brewer (2006); (2) criticize Brewer’s (2006, 2007, 2008, 2011) attempts to defend the object view; (3) refine Pautz’ (2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011) arguments against the object view, which mainly resort to the fact that it cannot account for the grounding role of hallucinatory experiences; (4) and finally adjudicate in favor of the content view and against the overestimation of the naïve intuition.
Reprint years
PhilPapers/Archive ID
Revision history
First archival date: 2013-10-29
Latest version: 1 (2017-09-08)
View upload history
References found in this work BETA
The Transparency of Experience.Martin, Michael G. F.

View all 40 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Added to PP index

Total views
219 ( #19,464 of 48,853 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
37 ( #19,027 of 48,853 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks to external links.