The Phenomenological Problem of Perception

Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
A perceptual experience of a given object seems to make the object itself present to the perceiver’s mind. Many philosophers have claimed that naïve realism (the view that to perceive is to stand in a primitive relation of acquaintance to the world) provides a better account of this phenomenological directness of perceptual experience than does the content view (the view that to perceive is to represent the world to be a certain way). But the naïve realist account of this phenomenology has a conspicuous shortcoming: it explains the phenomenological directness of veridical perceptual experiences but not of hallucinations. Conversely, I maintain that a particular variety of the content view provides a unified account of the phenomenological directness of both veridical and hallucinatory experiences. If so, then contrary to what is often assumed, the phenomenological facts concerning perceptual experience are explained better by the content view than by naïve realism, and consequently, we have a compelling reason to prefer the content view to naïve realism.
PhilPapers/Archive ID
Revision history
First archival date: 2013-09-17
Latest version: 2 (2014-04-18)
View upload history
References found in this work BETA
Intentionality.Searle, John

View all 31 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Added to PP index

Total downloads
543 ( #3,758 of 37,176 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
25 ( #14,074 of 37,176 )

How can I increase my downloads?

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