Theories of perception

describe the definition of direct realism

the immediate objects of perception are mind independent objects and their properties

what is realism

the belief in mind independent objects

what is anti-realism

the belief in the mind dependence of objects

argument from illusion with respect to direct realism

the exsiten cure of illusions that make objects appear to habe properties they do not challeneges the direct cognitive access we have to reality

direct realism argument from perceptual cariation

different observers have different perceptions of the same object - so under direct realism they must be differt objets, which challenges the notion of a mind independent rewlitsy

argument from hallucination and direct realidm

Hallucinations are the perceptions of objects which do not exist in reality, questioning which perceptions are indeed mind indlenedent o jeffs

direct realism argument fron time lag

our sense expereinces have a slight delay from the supposed mind infependent reality, questioning the direct cofnitive contact we jave with reality.

how do direct realists draw an argument in response to hallucination and illusion

They argue that veridical perception is separate from these false perceptions

how do direct realists deal with the argument from perceptual variation

these percpetual differences are more in the observer than the objective reality - hwoever this question sthe truth of pereption

how. do direct realists deal with time lagq

they may claim it doesnt affect the truth of perception

what is indirect realism

the immediate objects of perception are mind independent objects and their properties

what is the beil of perception

the barrier between sense data and the mind independent objecf

what is a lockeian orimary wuality

thjnks in the object extstent solidity etc

what is a lockeian secondary quality

things in our perception e.g colour

how does indirect realism lead to schepticism

the veil of perception doesnt allow us direft access to the supposed mind independent world, and so there is mo reason to posit its existence

the involuntary nature of our experience as a defence of indirect realism - Locke

as our perceptiojs are involuntary, they mudt have an external cause - which is likely to be a mind independent object

the argument from the coherence of experience as a defence of indirect realism - Catharine Trotter-Cockburn

iur sense expriences exhibit a large degree of coherence and consitency- which indicates tha they adent purely subjective

the best hypothesis defence of indirect realism by Russell

An abductive argument - the mind independent world is the simplest and most useful hypothesis to explain the mind independent world of our experiences.

Berkley’s argument on the nature of objects againstt indirect realism

The nature of mind independent and mind dependent ideas are fundamentally different - one is transient, teh toehr is permanent - therefore they cannot be used to draw conclusions about one another

Berkley’sIdealism

The immediate objects of perception are mind-dependent objects

What is the central maxim of idealism (latin)

esse ist percipe (to be is to be perceived)

Berkley’s argument against primary and secondary qualities

Berkley argues that primary qualities are also mind dependent, as they are experienced through secondary qualities, which are mind=dependent

Berkley’s Master Argument.

He posits that an object cannot exist outside of a mind. All our perceptions are mind-dependent, so nothing we perceive outside our mind. Also, we cannot imagine a mind - independent object, as this is an inherent contradiction - the object exists within our imagination.

What role does God serve in Berkeley’s Idealism

The ultimate perceive and the guarantor of the consistency in the order of nature

What challenges does Berkley’s theory face with illusion and hallucination

As illusions and hallucinations are mind - dependent, and veridical perception is mind-dependent, they are equally reliable as a source of knowledge, and therefore indistinguishable

How may berkeley deal with hallucination

They could argue that they are deviations from perception and not true perception. They could also argue that our mind-depndent perceptions are consistent. He may also argue that only veridical perception is from God

What challenge does idealism face with solipsism

Under idealism, all that exists are mind-dependent objects and the mind itself. There is no evidence for other minds or external objects - so all that exists is your mind

How does Berkeley address Solipsism

Berkley addresses this by inferring the existence of other minds - one of which is God’s mind. These maintain the regularity of perception

Whats wrong with berkleys use of God

Berkeley’s God is an abductive inference based on the consistency and coherence in perception. In addition, God cannot experience some of our perceptions - e.g pain.