Abstract
AbstractAccording to ‘orthodox’ representationalism, perceptual states possess constitutive veridicality (truth, accuracy, or satisfaction) conditions. Typically, philosophers who deny orthodox representationalism endorse some variety of anti-representationalism. But we argue that these haven’t always been, and needn’t continue to be, the only options. Philosophers including Descartes, Malebranche and Helmholtz appear to have rejected orthodox representationalism while nonetheless endorsing perceptual representations of a fundamentally practical kind not captured by orthodox representationalism. Moreover, we argue that the perceptual science called on by contemporary philosophers to defend orthodox representationalism instead motivates a return to this older view, and we suggest that contemporary philosophers may conceptualize fundamentally practical perceptual representations as ‘de agendo’ representations, a species of representation that has constitutive appropriateness rather than veridicality conditions.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference65 articles.
1. Adams, Z., & Maher, C. (2017). Constancy mechanisms and the normativity of perception. In Z. Adams & J. Browning (Eds.), Giving a damn: Essays in dialogue with John Haugeland. MIT Press.
2. Akins, K. (1996). Of sensory systems and the “aboutness” of mental states. Journal of Philosophy, 93(7), 337–372. https://doi.org/10.2307/2941125
3. Begby, E. (2011). Review of Tyler Burge, origins of objectivity. Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews, 2011(2).
4. Brentano, F. (1874). Psychology from an empirical standpoint (2nd ed.). Routledge.
5. Buccella, A. (2021). The problem of perceptual invariance. Synthese, 199, 13883–13905. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-021-03402-2