Indiect Realism Flashcards
What is indirect realism?
It is the view that:
1. The external world exists independently of the mind (hence, realism)
2. But we perceive the external world indirectly, via sense data (hence, indirect)
Indirect realism claims that the immediate object of perception is sense data. Thus sense data is caused by, and represents, the the mind-independent external world.
Key thinkers: Bertrand Russel, Locke
What is sense data?
Sense data is the content of perceptual experience, it’s not physical, it exists in mind. However, it is caused by and represents mind-independent physical objects.
Sense data is private — no one else can experience it.
This avoids problems with direct realism. For example, differences in perceptual variation can be explained by differences in sense data. The object itself stays the same throughout even if the sense data changes.
EXAMPLE:
While looking at a white table, someone might see it yellowish under yellow light or bluish under blue light.
The table itself remains the same (it is objectively white).
The sense data (the yellowish or bluish appearance) changes because of external factors like lighting.
What are John Locke’s primary qualities?
Properties inherent in the objects itself. They are objective e.g size, shape etc.
What are John Locke’s secondary qualities?
Powers of an object to cause sensations in humans. They are subjective e.g color, taste, smell etc.
Why is Berkeley’s objection to indirect realism?
Indirect realism says that what we perceive is sense data that resembles the mind-independent external world.
George Berkeley questions how it’s possible for mind-dependent sense data to resemble to mind-independent objects. For example, one moment my sense data of a square table, the next it’s diamond-shaped. The sense data changes, but the mind independent object doesn’t — so how can the two thing resemble each other>
What is the veil of perception?
Indirect realism leads to scepticism about the nature and existence of the external world. What is the difference between experiencing sense data caused by an external object and experiencing the same sense data without the object being present e.g a dream.
If we only perceive sense data, nit the object itself (indirectly), how can we know anything about the external world? — we can’t tell if sense data is accurate or that there is an external world at all.
We can’t get beyond this veil of perception (sense data) to access the external world behind it. So, how can indirect realism justify its claim that there is a mind-independent external world that causes sense dat if we never actually perceive the mind-independent world itself (we only perceive through sense data).
What is the Russel’s reply to skepticism?
The existence of the external world is the best hypothesis.
If I see a cat on the sofa, go for and tea and come back seeing my cat on the floor, then we can make hypotheses.
1. The cat exists independently of my mind, so cat physically moved from sofa to the floor.
2. The cat doesn’t exist independently of my mind. It stopped existing while I was away and then came back into existence
1st claim at least explains the connection between two perceptions (cat on the sofa and floor), while 2nd doesn’t explain it at all
Furthermore, 1st claim explains why a cat get hungry over time even when I’m not perceiving it
What is Locke’s first response to criticisms? (The involuntary nature of perception)
Locke argues that sensory perception is not under our control, suggesting it originates form external objects. We cannot avoid seeing the sun or feeling heat when exposed to it, regardless of our will. This highlights between the external object (the sun) and the idea or sensation (the experience of heat). For Locke, heat you feel is a mental idea triggered by the sun, not the sin itself.
Therefore, we don’t perceive objects directly, but through sensations caused by them. We experience external world indirectly — via mental representations.
What is possible response to Locke’s first reply?
Even if Locke proved that external world exists, he didn’t succeed in proving that sense data that we experience is an accurate representation of the external world — our perception may be different
What is Locke’s second response to criticisms? (The coherence of different senses)
For example, the paper you are writing on, you can see these written words or ask someone else to read it out loud. Anyway, you receive the same information via different source
Another, if I see fire and also feel heat, then the coherence between two senses suggest there is an external world, because the same mind-independent object CAUSED BOTH perceptions.
However, you experience ideas of light and heat in your mind, not the fire itself. These sensations are caused by the external object but are not the object itself, which proves indirect realism to be true.
What is a possible response to Locke’s second reply?
Coherence doesn’t require external objects. For example, in dreams different senses might appear to cohere without an any external object causing them.
