direct realism: perception

Question 1

25 mark plan:
asses direct realism.

Answer 1

intro: argue DR is false!:(
define: mind-independent objects, direct perception

para1: time lag

Response: Tim lag response (confusion)

para3: illusion

response: DR response to illusion

response to response: hallucinations!!

conclusion: DR is false!

Question 2

direct realism is the view:

Answer 2

• external world exists indepently of the mind (i.e realism)
  -we perceive the external world directly

Question 3

key term- immediate objects of perception

Answer 3

means the things which we perceive directly.

Question 4

support for direct realism

Answer 4

+avoids scepticism: we know about it because our senses provide immediate access to its true nature.
+has explanatory power: if im directly aware of physical reality + its properties explains why i can execute range of practical daily actions e.g finding food.
+explains why i percieve what i do: e.g i see the tree is green because the tree is green.
+explains why we agree about what we percieve and is in tune with out senses that occupy same universe as everyone else.

Question 5

time lag argument

Answer 5

The sun is 150,000,000km from earth. Light travels at 300,000,000 meters per second.
This means it takes approximately 8 minutes for light to reach earth. So, when you look at the sun, you are seeing it as it was 8 minutes ago- i.e there is a difference between the sun itself + your perception of it. In other words you are not percieving the sun directly.

Question 6

time lag argument structure

Answer 6

1. direct realism states that we percieve the external world directly, immediately + accurately.
2. light from stars + other distant objects takes so long to reach our eyes that we cannot see them as they are at the moment.
3. If things appear to be different from the way they actually are, then we do not percieve the world directly + accurately.
4. Therefore, direct realism is false.

Question 7

time lag response

Answer 7

the direct realist can argue that this response confuses what we percieve with how we percieve it. Yes, we percieve objects via light + sound waves + yes, it takes time for these light + sound waves to travel through space. But what we are percieving is still a mind-independent object- it’s just we are percieving it as it was moments ago rather than how it is now.

Question 8

Russel perceptual variation ( criticism)

Answer 8

differences in perceptions variation provide a problem for direct realism
e.g when i stand on one side of the room a shiny wooden table may have a white spot where the light is shining on it. But to someone standing on the other side of the room there may be no white spot.
But the white spot is either there or it isn’t - it can’t be both!
means = one of us is not perceiving the table directly as it is.

Russel more examples with the table:
shape of the table- from directly overhead may appear rectangular. few meters away may look kite-shaped.
Again- can’t be both
examples: highlight the differences in our perception.
according to direct realism: there should be no differences between perception and reality.
all these variations in perception suggest that there is no real way to perceive the world

Question 9

perceptual variation argument structure

Answer 9

p1 direct realism says what we perceive is the object itself
p2 perceptual change (depending on where u stand)
p3 the object itself does not change
p4 so, if the perception chnages but the object does not, then what are perceiving is not the object itself
c. so direct realism is false! :(

Question 10

argument from illusion (criticism)

Answer 10

DR says we percieve the external world directly as it is. If true how is it that reality can be different to our perception of it?(Ayer)
Example : when a pencil is placed in a glass of water, it looks crooked. But it isnt really crooked.
If direct realism is true, the external world would be exactly as we percieve it. However in case of illusion there in an obvious difference between perception + reality.
If things appear to be different from the way they actually are then we dont periceve the world itself accuaretly: we percieve sense data. Therefore, direct realism is false.

Question 11

possible response illusion criticism

Answer 11

Direct realist could reply that the pencil has the relational property of looking crooked to certain pericevers (even tho it isnt). In the example, direct realism would argue it appears bent because we are accurately percieving light refraction.
+ we can occationally misinterpret what we periceve.

Question 12

argument from hallucination

Answer 12

more extreme version agrument from illusion. DR says when we percieve something we are percieving something in the external world (directly). But during halluctions- we percieve things that arent even there.
Whats causing these perceptions? It cant be the external world - at least not directly- because there is no external object being percieved at all.
Argument points out- hallucinations (illusory perceptions) are often qualitavely indistguishable from verdical perceptions (i.e hallucinations look as realistic as real objects do).

Question 13

hallucination arugment structure

Answer 13

p1. direct realism states that we percieve the world directly + accuartely.
p2. In an illusion, we percieve an object as having particular properties.
p3. the real object does not have these properties/ no such object exists
p4. if things appear to be different from the way they actually are, then we do not percieve the world accurately.
c. Therefore, direcet realism is false.