Affiliation:
1. Department of Philosophy & Centre for Vision Research, York University , Canada
Abstract
Abstract
Perceptual experience supports the assignment of confidences in belief – doxastic confidences. To explain this fact, many philosophers appeal to Perceptual Indeterminacy, which holds that perceptual content can be more or less determinate. Others instead appeal to Perceptual Confidence, which says that perceptual experience supports doxastic confidences because it assigns confidences too. Morrison argues that a primary reason to favour Perceptual Confidence is that it is uniquely capable of accounting for bell-shaped doxastic confidence distributions; we call this the bell curve objection to Perceptual Indeterminacy. Here we show that two recent defences of Perceptual Indeterminacy, due to Nanay and Raleigh and Vindrola, fail to adequately address the bell curve objection. But we also argue that all is not lost for proponents of Perceptual Indeterminacy. They can counter the bell curve objection by embracing a third view, which we call Perceptual Noise.
Funder
Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
Canada First Research Excellence Fund
Publisher
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Reference11 articles.
1. On perceptual confidence and ‘completely trusting your experience’;Beck;Analytic Philosophy,2020
2. Humans integrate visual and haptic information in a statistically optimal fashion;Ernst;Nature,2002
3. A layered view of space perception;Green;British Journal for the Philosophy of Science,2017
4. Perceptual confidence;Morrison;Analytic Philosophy,2016
5. Visual confidences and direct perceptual justification;Munton;Philosophical,2016