Direct Realism Flashcards
What is perception?
Perception is the process by which be become aware of objects, including our own body.
What is Direct Realism?
This is the view that we perceive mind-independent physical objects and all of their properties directly with no intermediaries.
Direct realists believe the reason we see things is because they are truly there (mind independent) and take up space, have size, shape, colour and so on.
The properties we perceive are the properties of the object itself and when there is no one around to ‘sense’ them, they still remain the same.
There are only two parts to perception; the perceiver and the perceived objects.
State the 5 main criticisms of Direct Realism.
- The causal argument (not spec)
- The time-lag argument
- Argument from illusion
- Argument from hallucination
- Argument from perceptual relativity
What is the causal argument?
Science tells us that there is a long causal chain between a mind-independent object and an individual’s perception of it, so it cannot be perceived directly.
LIGHT FROM OBJECT ~ LIGHT FOCUSES ON RETINA ~ NERVE IMPULSE TO BRAIN ~ IMAGE PRODUCED IN MIND
This is a multi-step process. Our minds only ever get to know the last stage so we cannot have direct contact with the object itself.
This suggests objects are not perceived directly rather indirectly as the result of a causal chain of events between the perceiver and the perceived.
How do direct realists argue against the causal argument?
Direct realists argue that the other three steps are perceptually irrelevant so objects are still perceived directly. Our minds only get to know the last stage, we are not aware of the others.
What is the time-lag argument?
It takes time for light waves, or sound waves, or smells etc to get from physical objects to our sense organs.
We can perceive something after it ceases to exist (e.g. distant stars) therefore we aren’t perceiving physical objects directly.
PARAPHRASE RUSSEL, THE PROBLEMS OF PHILOSOPHY
Who is Russel? What did he say in his book?
Russel, an indirect realist, supported the time lag argument in his book “the problems of philosophy”.
He mentions the sun and the eight minutes in which it takes for its light to reach us. The term “seeing” the sun refers to how the sun was 8 minutes ago, therefore our current perception of it is not direct.
He also mentions the idea of the sun no longer existing. If it ceased to exist within the last 8 minutes, it would make no difference to our perception of the sun and what we term “seeing the sun”. We, in fact, are not seeing the sun but what existed of the sun within the last 8 minutes.
How do direct realists respond to the time-lag argument?
They argue that this is irrelevant and that this criticism is confusing what we perceive with how we perceive it. We are still perceiving it directly, even if it was moments ago.
What is the argument from illusion?
An illusion is when we perceive an object to have a property or properties that it does not have in reality.
Therefore, if the object itself does not have the property it appears to have, then the thing we are directly aware of cannot be the object itself but something else. This something else is mind-dependent sense data.
Illusions can be subjectively indistinguishable from veridical perception and so we perceive sense data in both.
Therefore, what we are directly aware of in all perceptions is actually sense data, not mind independent objects.
Therefore, direct realism is false.
How do direct realists argue against illusion?
Direct realists may argue that the illusions we perceive come down to relational properties.
For example, if we consider Russell’s table and the fact that the table is rectangular with four 90° sides. The table being shaped as a diamond is a relational property to where you are stood.
A relational property is where an object has a property but only in relation to something else, it does not have that property independently.
What is the argument of hallucination?
A hallucination is to perceive something that does not exist in reality - our experiences are deceptive.
Unlike illusion, a physical object is not perceived at all and so what we perceive must be mind-dependent sense-data.
Hallucinations can be a experiences that are subjectively indistinguishable from veridical perception and so our sense data is the same for both hallucinations and veridical perceptions.
Therefore, in all cases we see sense data and not physical object’s immediately.
How do direct realists argue against the argument of hallucination?
Direct realists argue that we are able to distinguish between veridical perception and hallucinations.
If hallucinations were really perceptually indistinguishable from veridical perceptions, we would not know we had them and therefore the argument from hallucinations could not even be formulated.
What is the argument from perceptual relativity?
Different people perceive the same physical objects differently, what each person perceives is how the object appears to them. There are variations in perception.
Our perception varies without corresponding changes in the physical objects we perceive.
Therefore the properties physical objects have and the properties they appear to have are not identical.
What we are immediately aware of in perception is not exactly the same as what exists independently of our minds. It comes down to sense-data which is distinct from the physics objet.
How do direct realists argue against perceptual relativity?
It comes down to relational properties. If we consider Russel’s table, it’s shape is rectangular even if it doesn’t always look rectangular.
We recognise that as we change where we are stood, the table ‘appears’ diamond shaped due to the changed relationship (relational properties) between us and the table.
