Study Task Answers

Define indirect realism. (3)

Indirect realism is the belief that immediate objects of perception are mind - dependent objects that are caused by and represent mind - independent objects. In other words, you don’t directly perceive physical objects but what you are perceiving is a representation of a physical object.

What is a primary quality according to Locke? (3)

A primary quality is a quality which is independent of any observer. In other words, they don’t need to be perceived by someone to exist - so it’s permanent. For example, primary qualities include: position, extension, size and solidity. If you chopped up an object into small pieces, they would still maintain all of their primary qualities.

According to Locke, what is a secondary quality? (3)

A secondary quality is a quality which objects have only because they are perceived. They are subjective as people can see the same secondary quality differently - also they are non-essential. For example, an apple could look red to someone but look more pink to someone else, as well as that, the colour of the apple is non-essential for it to be an apple. Secondary qualities include: colour, sound, taste and smell and are non-measurable (you can’t measure a colour).

Explain the differences between primary and secondary qualities. (5)

A primary quality is a quality which is independent of any observer (they don’t need to be perceived by someone to exist - so it’s permanent). For example, primary qualities include: position, extension, size and solidity.

The difference between secondary and primary qualities is that primary qualities are permanent - if you chopped an object into smaller pieces, it would maintain its primary qualities. However, a secondary quality is separable from the object - if you chopped up an object, it could lose it’s secondary qualities. Secondary qualities are the experiences a physical object makes you go through and primary qualities are part of the object itself, regardless of whether someone experiences it.

Explain why, for Locke, extension is a primary quality (5)

Extension means that the physical object takes up space. Locke believes this is a primary quality because regardless of whether someone perceives a physical object, it will take up space. For example, however tiny you chopped up an apple into, it would still take up space. This means that extension is a quality you can’t take away from the object, whatever you do, in other words, extension is part of the apple. It is also measurable as you can measure extension. This means it is a primary quality.

Outline one similarity and one difference between direct realism and indirect realism. (5)

Direct realism is the belief that you perceive physical objects and their properties directly and that they are mind-independent. In other words, if no one was there to perceive the object, it would still exist - it exists in the physical world along with all its properties. Indirect realism is the belief that we don’t perceive physical objects directly - the immediate objects of perception are mind-dependent objects that are caused by and represent mind-independent objects. It believes that what we perceive when we perceive a physical object is sense data (which is mind-dependent) however it is produced by physical objects (which are mind-independent).

A similarity between direct realism and indirect realism is that they both believe that mind-independent objects exist - that there is a real physical world outside our mind of perception. Direct realists believe we perceive directly the physical world and their properties. Indirect realists believe that we indirectly perceive physical objects and their properties via sense data however there is a physical world, we just don’t necessarily perceive it exactly how it is. Both these theories base their ideas on the assumption that there even is a physical, mind-independent world to start with. This is probably an underlying assumption because both the theories would argue, if there’s nothing that exists to perceive, then why do we perceive in the first place?

A difference between direct realism and indirect realism is that they differ on how directly we perceive things. Direct realists believe we perceive physical objects and their properties directly, they believe that the objects are mind-independent and the way we perceive them and their properties are mind-independent. (In other words, the way we see the world is exactly how it exists, along with all its properties). However Indirect realists disagree on this and believe that we perceive physical, mind-independent objects but indirectly. They believe that we perceive physical objects and their properties through mind-dependent representations of the real object via sense data. This means they believe although we may perceive physical objects and their properties accurately, we never directly perceive it exactly how it exists out of the mind.

Explain Russell’s claim that the existence of the external world is the ‘best hypothesis’. (5)

Indirect realism is the theory that the immediate objects of perception are mind-dependent objects that are caused by and represent mind-independent objects.

However there is a problem with Indirect realism - it leads to scepticism about the existence of physical, mind-independent objects. As we never perceive physical objects directly, according to indirect realism, how can we be sure there even is physical objects? Indirect realists assume that sense data is the effect of physical objects however there could be something else that causes our sense data and our perception - this is called the explanatory gap. The explanatory gap is the fact there’s no explanation about how objects cause sense data. The explanatory gap therefore leads to scepticism.

Russel, an Indirect realist, responds to this by his ‘best hypothesis’ theory. The existence of the external world is his best hypothesis. Russel argues there are two options - either physical objects do exist and cause our sense data or physical objects don’t exist so therefore there is no explanation of where my sense data comes from. Russel argues that the best hypothesis is the first option as what else explains our sense data? This can be shown through the cat example - You see a cat in one corner and then you turn around again and the cat has moved to the sofa. If there is nothing but sense data then the cat does not exist when you don’t see it - then why would it move? What would link the two perceptions together? Russel claims that there must be an external cause that is mind-independent because otherwise, the cat would just stay in the same position.

There are other possible explanations of my sense data. For example, it could be a hallucination or a dream. But these are clearly worse explanations, since they provide no explanation for why I perceived what I did. Whereas the existence of a real object with certain properties, does explain what I saw more effectively. This is a simpler explanation and is therefore the best hypothesis. It is a hypothesis because it is a theory, where other explanations are possible, but Russell judges that the existence of real objects is a better hypothesis than the alternatives.

**Outline and explain why causation and representation are problems for indirect realism (12)**

Indirect Realism is the theory that we indirectly perceive physical objects through our sense data. In other words, the immediate objects of perception are mind dependent objects that are caused by and represent mind-independent objects. Locke, an Indirect Realist, argued that physical objects have primary and secondary qualities. Primary qualities are the qualities objects have that exist whether they are perceived or not. They don’t need to be perceived to exist. Primary qualities are measurable and inseparable from the object, this includes: extension, shape, motion and number. Secondary qualities are the qualities objects have only because people perceive them. Secondary qualities are completely perceptual and changeable. They are in the mind so also very subjective. Secondary qualities include: colour, sound, taste and smell. Locke talked about primary and secondary qualities to respond to perceptual variation. Sense data is a very important thing in Indirect Realism, sense-data is mind-dependent perception (e.g: sound, feel and colour). Indirect Realists believe we never perceive the world directly so we are constantly perceiving through sense data. This means that they also believe physical objects (which we will never directly perceive) cause our sense data. However, there are two issues that arise from this concept and that is the question of causation and representation.

Representative realism is Locke’s version of Indirect Realism - this is the idea that objects cause sense data and our perception of objects accurately represent the real physical object. The problem with representation is a problem Berkeley pointed out - if our sense data accurately represents physical objects, then why is our sense data variable? Our sense data is ‘perpetually fleeting and variable’ but how can that represent a physical object which is constant and unchanging? Berkeley argues that it is clear our sense data therefore does not accurately represent physical objects. As well as that, we cannot talk about accurate resemblance as we have nothing to compare our sense data to. To confidently say that sense data accurately resembles physical objects, we would have to see the real physical objects too to compare (like you would with a landscape and a landscape painting) however we cannot because we are stuck in the veil of perception. The veil of perception is the concept that the real world is unknowable to us as we only perceive sense data - so it’s the inability to step out of our perception to see the unmediated physical world. Therefore, representation is a problem for Indirect Realists.

Also, causation is a problem for Indirect Realists. Indirect Realism claims that physical objects cause the sense data we perceive. However, there is also a problem with this - to suggest that physical objects cause sense data, we would have to experience both the cause and effect. So, we would have to experience both the physical object and the sense data that it causes. In that way, we could then accurately compare the correlation to prove the validity of the causal relationship. However, we can’t do this because we only perceive through sense data (according to Indirect Realists) therefore, we will never be able to perceive unmediated physical objects - once again we are stuck in the veil of perception. Therefore, representation and causation are both a problem for Indirect Realists as we are stuck in the veil of perception so would never be able to prove causation or representation.

Outline and explain why Berkeley argues that we cannot know the nature of mind-independent objects because mind-dependent ideas (sense-data) cannot be like mind independent objects (12)

Indirect Realism is the belief that immediate objects of perception are mind dependent objects that are caused by and represent mind independent objects. In other words, we never directly perceive anything because we perceive things through sense data, so what we see is a representation of the real, physical world. Sense data is mind dependent perception such as feel or sight. A lot of indirect realists, such as Russel, argued you can know the nature of mind-independent objects because there’s a correlation between the two, however Berkeley argued otherwise. Another concept important with Indirect Realism is primary and secondary qualities. Primary qualities are measurable qualities of physical objects that do not need to be perceived to exist. Primary qualities are unchanging and inseparable from the object, this includes: extension, solidity and shape. Secondary qualities are perceptual. They need to be perceived to exist and are subjective and changeable (this includes: colour, smell and taste, for example). Berkeley argues that we cannot know the nature of mind-independent objects for two reasons.

The first reason is Berkeley points out how can sense data possibly represent a physical object which is accordingly unchanging and fixed when sense data is ‘perpetually fleeting and variable?’ Our sense data is constantly changing and is also subjective - so everyone perceives things differently. How can that accurately represent mind-independent objects? In this case, we won't be able to perceive the true nature of mind-independent objects because we inaccurately perceive everything through sense data in the first place. Berkeley also points out that although many Indirect Realists argue that primary qualities are unchanging, our perception of primary qualities are changeable and subjective. For example, a coin would seem to have a circular shape (primary quality) at at a ninety degree angle however if you look at it from a forty five degree angle, the shape looks different. This once again shows that we are constantly perceiving through sense data thus never actually seeing the true nature of physical objects through an unmediated way and sense data is not like the true physical object because sense data is subjective and changeable.

The second reason is Berkeley argues that we cannot know the true resemblance of sense data from physical objects. Berkeley argues that how can we possibly know sense data accurately represents the physical world as we only ever perceive the world through sense data? We are stuck in the ‘veil of perception’ which means we can never step out of our own perception to view the world how it is, unmediated. Therefore we have no idea whether sense data accurately represents physical objects as we have nothing to compare the sense data to. For example, you would need to compare a landscape painting to the actual landscape to check it’s validity.

In summary, Berkeley argues that mind-dependent ideas cannot be like mind-independent objects because sense data is fleeting, whereas physical objects are permanent and we cannot know the nature of mind-independent objects because we cannot trust the sense data accurately represents the world.

Outline and explain Berkeley’s attack on the primary/secondary quality distinction (12)

Primary qualities, according to Locke, are qualities that a physical object has which do not need to be perceived to exist. They are permanent, measurable and inseparable from the physical object. Locke said an example using a grain of wheat. If you chopped up a grain of wheat, it would still retain the solidity, extension, figure and mobility. This is what primary qualities are - qualities that are inseparable from an object such as: solidity, extension, shape, motion and number. Secondary qualities are qualities that have to be perceived to exist. Therefore, they are subjective and separable from the object. Secondary qualities include: colour, sound, taste, smell and temperature. They are changeable and not measurable. Secondary qualities are non-essential for the object, for example, for an apple to exist as an apple, it is not essential for it to be red. Berkeley attacks this distinction by arguing that there is no difference between the qualities as they are both mind-dependent.

He starts off by agreeing with Locke about secondary qualities, by arguing that secondary qualities are mind-dependent. He talks about temperature being a secondary quality, as when you put a cold hand in a bowl of water, it feels hot but when you put a hot hand in the same bowl of water, it feels cold. The water can’t be both cold and hot at the same time, this perceptual variation supports the theory that secondary qualities are changeable and subjective.

Berkeley then disagrees with Locke, arguing that primary qualities are also mind-dependent. For example, Locke said that a primary quality included shape. However, Berkeley points out that shape is changeable in perception. If there is a coin at a ninety degree angle, it looks circular however as soon as it is put at a zero degree angle, it looks like a straight line. We know that it is not a straight line but the shape of the coin appears to change, perceptually. Therefore, shape isn’t a mind-independent quality as we can see a physical, unchangeable object as a different shape (this is perceptual variation). Therefore, we can’t say an object has one real shape based off how it is perceived as shape is actually subjectively perceived. Even motion is not constant, we measure the speed of motion by how quickly our minds work - to a creature that thinks a lot faster than us, our fastest movements would appear slow. Therefore, motion (which according to Locke is a primary quality) is subjective. Both of these examples from Berkeley show that primary qualities are just as mind-dependent as secondary qualities. Therefore, Berkeley argues there is no distinction between them, everything we perceive is through sense-experiences because all qualities we perceive are mind-dependent. If this is the case, we can be sceptical about the existence of the external world because we constantly experience perceptual variation.