Abstract
AbstractThis paper addresses a potential contradiction between the two primary philosophical traditions that inform Gibsonian ecological psychology: the phenomenological and pragmatist traditions. These two traditions exhibit potentially contradictory intuitions about the epistemic role of direct perception. This epistemic role of direct perception was famously problematized by Sellars’ critique of the myth of the given (1956; 1997), and we draw on it here to serve as a test case for the Gibsonian synthesis of phenomenology and pragmatism. While ecological psychology’s emphasis on the firstperson perspective of organisms shares in the legacy of the phenomenological tradition, it also tends to assume direct experience as a given, something basic and foundational to knowledge. Pragmatism, on the other hand, is generally suspicious of experience as a foundational given. We argue that Gibson’s successful synthesis of these two traditions is also what makes his theory of affordances less susceptible to the myth of the given than some phenomenological approaches to perception. Namely, on the Gibsonian account of perception is always part of an action-perception cycle that takes place in and through embodied action and therefore no one act of perception functions as an epistemic given
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference41 articles.
1. Carnap, R. (1963). Replies and Systematic Expositions. In P. Arthur (Ed.), The Philosophy of Rudolph Carnap (pp. 859–1016). Open Court.
2. Chemero, A. (2003). An Outline of a Theory of Affordances. Ecological Psychology, 15(2), 181–195.
3. De Santis, D. (2019). Méditations Hégéliennes vs. Méditations Cartésiennes: Edmund Husserl and Wilfrid Sellars on the Given. In A. Ferrarin, D. Moran, E. Magrì and D. Manca (Eds.), Hegel and Phenomenology (pp. 177–190). Springer.
4. Dewey, J. (1896). The Reflex Arc Concept in Psychology. Psychological Review, 3, 357–370.
5. Dewey, J. (1939). International Encyclopedia of Unified Science, vol. 13 ii/4: Theory of Valuation. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Reprinted in J. A. Boydston (Ed.) The Later Works of John Dewey 1925–1953. Southern Illinois University Press.