Direct/Indirect Realism (epistemology)

Question 1

Direct Realism

Answer 1

= The immediate objects of perception are mind-independent (exist without perception) objects and their properties
States that we see properties directly, in other words when we look at something we are seeing the perceived object as it really is. It also states that objects continue to exist beyond perception. (wrong)

Question 2

Issue 1 with direct realism -> Perceptual Variation (Bertrand Russel)

Answer 2

= Perceptual variation argues the gap between reality and appearance. Appearance of an object may vary depending on conditions under which it is observed .

Table example:
- table appears brown but when we change the angle of perception, the lighting changes, and therefore the colour of the table may appear white where the light is reflected.
- there is no basis for privileging one colour over the other, so the table cannot be said to have a particular colour.
- Since the table itself doesn’t change, we must distinguish the real table from one appearing in our minds.
- Therefore, the real table is not immediately known to us at all, but must be an inference from what is immediately known.
- So direct realism is false as the apparent properties of an object are not the same as the real properties.

Question 3

Strengths of direct realism

Answer 3

1) Agreement
= Explains why our perceptions of an object is universal. For example, if we were to line up a group of people, they would be able to name the colour of a banana the same -> yellow. So, if the majority of our population are in agreement about the colour of an object, it cannot be mind dependent as that would be impossible? As people would have disagreements, but they do not. Therefore, the immediate objects of perception are mind dependent.

2) Avoids scepticism
= States that we perceive reality directly, and that the immediate objects of perception are mind independent, so if we observe reality directly, we know what reality is like, and therefore know it exists.
- no veil of perception (issue for indirect realist)
= Therefore, it gives us a clear account of how we have knowledge of the external world; our senses provide immediate access to its true nature.
3) Intuitive and easy (Ockham’s Razor)
- idealism and IR are more complex, this explains the external world in the best, simplest way.
= It makes sense to say that my perception of a green tree corresponds to reality as a green tree. It is what fits in with our human intuition - that there are mind independent objects.
= I have no control over what I perceive, so there must be mind independent objects,

Question 4

Sense Data (russell)

Answer 4

what exists in experience (not in the real world) - in our minds

Sense data are mind-dependent representations of mind-independent objects which we perceive immediately.
-> subjective ; no one else can experience another person’s sense-data.
-> Temporary; they only exist when being perceived; if there is no perceiver there is no sense-data

Question 5

How would a defender of direct realism deny perceptual variation?

Answer 5

-W still view the table directly (just not precisely as it is). We are still aware of the table apparently and realistically. The table appears differently from how it is dependent on the observers area of perception (ie place in the room in relation to the table).

Question 6

Veridical perception

Answer 6

‘True’ perception

Question 7

What is a disjunctivist

Answer 7

A direct realist who claims that hallucinations and veridical (true) perception are not the same thing, so a hallucination is not a problem for a disjunctivist

Question 8

Issue 2 with direct realism- Illusion

Answer 8

Perceiving an object which appears to be one thing, when reality it is another.(e.g a straw half immersed in water may appear bent when in fact it is straight). Thus, what we immediately perceive (sense data) cannot be what is there in reality.
- misrepresentations of reality

P1: When subject to an allusion, an object appears to perceive it to have a particular property (bent straw in water) .
P2: Perceiver is directly aware of this apparent property.
P3: But the object doesn’t have this property in real life: it is a straight straw.
C1: Therefore, what the perceive it is directly aware of (bent straw) , and what is real (straight straw) are distinct.
C2: DR is false: we do not perceive physical objects directly.

Question 9

Hallucinations vs illusions

Answer 9

Hallucinations are when we perceive an immediate object which in reality does not exist, whereas illusions are a misinterpretation of a correct sensory input.

Question 10

Hallucinations - issue with direct realism

Answer 10

Dreams/hallucinations we are directly aware of, and a direct realist is dependent upon us experiencing reality directly, however we are aware that what we perceive in a dream is not real. In the same way that hallucinations are when we perceive an immediate object that does not correspond with reality.Thus, what we are immediately aware of is not a veridical (true) perception.

P1: Hallucinations occur when a person perceive something that doesn’t exist outside the mind
C1: So what they perceive, the hallucination, only exists in their mind.
P2: Hallucinations can be subjectively indistinguishable from vertical perception.
P3: But if hallucinations are vertical perception or subjectively, indistinguishable, then the person must be aware of the same thing in both cases.
C2: Therefore, what we are directly aware of June for the contraception must also be in our minds. C3: Therefore, we perceive the world indirectly and direct realism is false.

Question 11

Time Lag- issue 4 with direct realism

Answer 11

Signals from events take time to travel across space. For example, our perception of the sun. Direct realists would claim that we see then sun directly as it is in that moment of time. However, light takes approximately 8 minutes to reach earth. Therefore, what we perceiving the sun as it WAS, not how it IS. Therefore, direct realism is false as we are not perceiving the sun as it is.

Question 12

Direct realists argument against time-lag

Answer 12

-They accept the idea that there is a time lag in perception but they would deny that we do not directly perceive objects. Although we may not be perceiving the object in the same point in time, we are nonetheless directly aware of it as it was.

-Time lag is about HOW we perceive rather that WHAT we perceive. We perceive objects directly meaning that what they appear to us is the same as what exists in reality. It does not matter what object we are perceiving (whether its instant or not) we are still directly aware of what is there or what was there.

Question 13

Russell’s claim against DR’s response to time lag

Answer 13

Weak response: if the sun were to explode we would not know about this for a whole 8 minutes. This means the sun we believe to be perceiving does not actually exist - so objects cannot be mind independent<sense data

Question 14

indirect realism

Answer 14

the immediate objects of perception are mind-dependent objects (sense data) that are caused by and represent mind-independent objects

Question 15

John Locke’s Primary/Secondary Quality Distinction

Answer 15

primary: properties that exist within the object them self
- objective
- mind-independent
-e.g solidity, extension, shape, motion, number
- cause secondary qualities

secondary: sense data (exist in experience/found in perception/in our minds)
-subjective
- mind-dependent
- represent but do not resemble primary qualities
-e.g colour, texture, smell, temperature
= not objectively real , can only be subjectively perceived

(in a 5 marker use example of heat and pain)

Question 16

Indirect Realists solving the issues of direct realism (positives)

Answer 16

perceptual variation -> The same object can appear different to different observers or to the same observer from different angles, because what we are immediately aware of is not the object as it truly is, but as it appears .

illusions -> When the image I have in mind does not correspond to the way things are in the world, I am subject to some sort of illusion.

hallucinations -> Hallucinations are possible as they occur when a sensation occurs in the mind, but there is nothing corresponding to it in the external mind (mind-dependent//, hallucinations only occur to one sense.
In both dreams and hallucinations we can find examples which are indistinguishable from the veridical perception. But it is very rare to have ones where the senses cohere as well as in reality.

time-lag -> Sense data are not the same as the object, so it is not an issue that the experience is delayed

Question 17

Unnecessary reification (criticism of Indirect realism)

Answer 17

a fallacy of ambiguity -> when an abstract idea is treated as if it were a concrete real event = sense data according to JL Austin

= sense data is a fallacy(mistaken belief) as it takes the abstract belief into a real event, whereas it may not be veridical.

Question 18

scepticism about external world (issue of IR)

Answer 18

P1: All I have direct access to is experience (secondary qualities and sense data)
P2: I do not have direct access to reality
C: I can not move from how things appear to how things are, therefore, we can’t conclude what reality is like or that it even exists.

‘veil of perception’ -> All we ever have access to is experience. Thus, there is a ‘veil of perception’ which we cannot peer beyond to show us reality. Therefore, not only can we not know what the world is really like, but we can never know that the real world exists.

Question 19

Locke’s involuntary nature of our experience (response against scepticism)

Answer 19

P1: I have complete control over my imagination (voluntary)
P2: I have no control over what I perceive as they are produced in my mind, by exterior causes, and force themselves onto us. (latter ideas)
C1: Therefore, Locke defends indirect realism as it is that our perceptions are caused by objects that exist outside of the mind.

Question 20

Locke and Cockburn’s argument of the coherence of experiences (response against scepticisim)

Answer 20

• Locke proposed that the external world must exist due to the coherence of our senses.
  = The way our senses cohere with one another suggest external world does exist. E.g a fire is evidenced by sight, sound, heat and paint. Due to our senses being in agreement, it suggests that the external world probably exists.
• Cockburn claims that different senses from the same object are very different (e.g sight and sound), and we can learn which senses cohere and begin to reliably predict which senses go together- e.g smell fresh bread to know what it looks like.

BEST EXAMPLE:
When you sit an exam you can feel the movement of the pen and you can perceive the pen writing words. Therefore there is a difference between imagining the words and actually seeing them, so it suggests that it couldn’t be all in our mind and there must be an external world

COHERENCE = logical and consistent

Question 21

Does the coherence of the senses account for hallucinations and dreams?

Answer 21

Yes, hallucinations only occur to one sense.
In both dreams and hallucinations we can find examples which are indistinguishable from the veridical perception. But it is very rare to have ones where the senses cohere as well as in reality.

Question 22

Russell’s argument that the external world is the best hypothesis

Answer 22

Russell’s argument of continuity conveys that he cannot prove the existence of the external world but use the cat example to explain why he thought that the best explanation for our experience was that the external world does really exist…
Cat example ->
- A cat grows hungry in Russell’s absence, indicating its existence.
-The cat is a mind independent object, so can do things independently beyond our mind (such as grow hungry).
-Therefore, the cat exists.

Question 23

What is the difference between scepticism about the EXISTENCE of the external world and scepticism about the NATURE of the external world?

Answer 23

Existence -> Ontological problem , we cannot know stuff exists .
Nature -> Epistemic problem, we cannot know what they are like or whether they can be known therefore, we cannot know what it is really like

Question 24

How does IR lead to scepticism of the nature of mind-independent objects?

Answer 24

1-> Cause secondary qualities, resemble the object itself ( density , shape etc)
2-> Represent, but do not resemble primary ones( colour, senses etc)

Resemblance = Looks like/Share qualities
Representation = Stands for

= If secondary qualities do not resemble the object, then the world in reality is nothing like a mental conception of it. We perceive a colourful, smelly, noisy, etc world but Locke suggests none of that is actually out there in the mind independent world. So what is the world actually like? We cannot know.

Question 25

Responses to external world scepticism

Answer 25

1) Involuntariness ( sun )
2) Coherence ( fire )
3) Continuity ( cat )

Question 26

Berkeley’s argument that our ideas cannot resemble material objects

Answer 26

• ideas,which are transient and fleeting, cannot be like object (which are fixed and permanent) according to LL
• if objects do not change, but the way they are represented to us through our senses does, then there is a difference between the object and the representation.
  -How can sense-data be an accurate representation of a fixed object, if the sense-data continually changes?

In a 12 marker could include Master arg (only in addition)