Indirect Realism Revision Flashcards
Indirect Realism:
the immediate objects of perception are mind-dependent objects that are caused by and represent mind-independent objects.
Sense Data:
the content of perceptual experience- its not a physical thing, only exists in the mind. It is caused by and represents mind-independent physical objects.
4 things about Sense data:
1) Mind-dependent. 2) Transient/ Temporary. 3) Private/ personal representation. 4) Infallible/ cannot be wrong or questioned.
4 things about Physical objects:
1) Mind-independent. 2) permanent/ consistent. 3) Public/ available for everyone to see. 4) Fallible/ can be subjected to doubt.
Why believe Indirect Realism:
1) It solves the issues of DR (time lags, hallucinations, perceptual variation, illusions). 2) It accounts for the subjectivity of perception.
3) It is a realist theory- people can still believe that there are mind-independent objects in the external world.
The Biggest issue with IDR?
The Veil of Perception: IDR seems to imply that there is a ‘gap’ between the mind dependent, and independent world. It suggests that, as we only see our sense data, there is a gap in-between our worlds. People argue that this gap can be called the veil of perception. Acting like a barrier, or door, between the two worlds.
Responses to the Veil of Perception:
1) Scepticism about the nature of the external world.
2) Scepticism about the Existence of the external world.
Responses to Scepticism of the Existence:
1) Russel: The best Hypothesis: Russel argues that the idea of IDR is simply the best hypothesis when questioned about the external world. It is the best way to let people have an understanding about how we perceive, without questioning the existence of the external world.
Locke 1: Involuntary nature of the senses: Locke states that when we perceive an object in the external world, we cannot change the shape, colour, existence, of the sense data in our minds, proving that there is actually something there. If we were simply imagining it, we would be able to modify our sense data, or make it cease to exist, like what we can do with our ideas and imaginations.
3) Locke 2: Coherence of senses: Locke argues that we can be certain of mind-independent objects through using our other senses to confirm their existence. He uses the example of seeing a fire, a being able to feel the heat, and smell the smoke too. This proves the fire is real.
3.1) Coherence of sense from Catherine Cockburn: Cockburn argues that even though there are not always connections between the senses, such as how you cannot teach a blind person red because of what it feels like, we can learn the resemblance of cohering senses through experiences. We can learn that a specific change in sensation in one sense, means that there is also a change in sensation in another one of our senses. Cockburn uses the example of, if a hob gets hotter, it gets redder, and even though we cannot explain that something gets hotter when it gets redder to a blind man, we can, through experience, notice the pattern that when something gets hotter, it will get redder, and vice versa. One sense is arbitrary, but all the senses are consistent. By feeling something is smooth, and seeing something is smooth, you could tell if other objects are also smooth but the correlation between sight and touch.
Responses to the Scepticism about the Nature of the External World:
1) Locke: Primary and Secondary objects: to argue against this scepticism, Locke states that we can have primary and secondary qualities within objects, and these can tell us about the basic nature of each mind-independent object. Primary qualities are measurable, inseparable from the object, and determine how the object interacts with other objects. For example, speed, height, direction etc. They set the foundation of the object, and you cannot have an object without these qualities. Secondary qualities, e.g., colour, warmth, taste etc, can be separated from the object, and can vary from mind to mind.
2) Russell: Relations between objects: this is the idea that even if we cannot tell the exact properties of external objects, we can tell any differences and similarities between them. If we see two red books, even if we cannot know they are red, we can know that they are of the same colour, or have the same qualities. However, if one book appears red, and the other blue, we can tell that they have different, or contrasting, colours or qualities in themselves.
Berkeley’s Criticisms:
1) The Likeness Principle: the idea that something can only be “like” something of it’s own kind. Here, Berkeley proposes the idea that no two different things, can be similar to one another. He argues that an idea (sense data), in no way could ever represent a physical object. Sense data has properties of being transient, and private, and can pop in and out of your mind, however this contrasts the external world.
2) There are no differences between Primary and Secondary Qualities: he argues that the primary qualities are mind independent. They are subjective, still, as someone who is really tall will see an object to be smaller than something that is smaller. If you are further away from the object, then it will look smaller to you than somebody who is standing at a different distance from the object. E.g., size. Imagine you’re an insect, a paperclip will be huge, compared to a paperclip as a human. The secondary qualities are also inseparable, you cannot have a colourless apple.
Solipsism:
the belief that the self is the only thing in the world. A questioning of the outer world and it’s existence.
