pdf
FLIP
Cómo citar
J. Boongaling, P. A. . (2018). Sobre los peligros del realismo directo de A.D. Smith. Discusiones Filosóficas, 19(33), 15–30. https://doi.org/10.17151/difil.2018.19.33.2
Más formatos de cita
Autores/as
Resumen
En este artículo se presenta una refutación de la versión de A.D. Smith del realismo directo según el cual podemos percibir directamente los objetos puramente físicos en el mundo externo (Smith, 2002). Sostengo que incluso si Smith es logra incorporar una caracterización de la percepción verídica que tenga en cuenta el carácter fenomenológico de nuestras experiencias perceptivas, su teoría de la percepción sigue siendo incoherente, ya que no puede proporcionar una solución a la inconsistencia de las tesis metafísicas y epistémicas de su teoría. Por este motivo, su versión de realismo directo es insostenible.
Palabras clave:
Citas
Brock, Stuart and Edwin Mares. Realism and Anti-Realism. Durham, Acumen, 2007. Print.
Cavanagh, Patrick. “Visual cognition”. Vision Res, 51 (3). 2011: 1538- 1551. Print.
Colyvan, Mark. The Indispensability of Mathematics. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001. Print.
Devitt, Michael. Realism/Anti-Realism. Eds. Stathis Psillos and Martin Curd, The Routledge Companion to Philosophy of Science. London, Routledge, 2008. 224-35. Print.
Fish, William. Perception, Hallucination, and Illusion. Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2009. Print.
Harman, Gilbert. “The Inference to the Best Explanation”. Philosophical Review, 74. 1965: 88-95. Print.
Leng, Mary. Mathematics and Reality. Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2010. Print.
Meadows, Philip John. “On A.D. Smith’s Constancy Based Defence of Direct Realism”. Philosophical Studies, 163 (2). 2013: 513-525. Print.
Poltoratski, Sonia et al. “Characterizing the effects of feature salience and top-down attention in the early visual system”. J Neurophysiol, 118. 2017: 564-73. Print.
Prinz, Jesse. “Empiricism”. Eds. Barber A. and R. Stainton, Concise Encyclopedia of Philosophy of Language and Linguistics. Amsterdam, Elsevier Ltd, 2010. 183-5. Print.
Quine, Willard Van Orman. The Ways of Paradox, and Other Essays: Revised and Enlarged Edition. Harvard, Harvard University Press, 1976. Print.
Smith, Anthony David. Philosophy of Perception. Massachusetts, Cambridge, 2002. Print.
Tarski, Alfred. Introduction to Logic and to the Methodology of the Deductive Sciences. 4th ed., New York, Oxford University Press, 1994. Print.
Cavanagh, Patrick. “Visual cognition”. Vision Res, 51 (3). 2011: 1538- 1551. Print.
Colyvan, Mark. The Indispensability of Mathematics. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001. Print.
Devitt, Michael. Realism/Anti-Realism. Eds. Stathis Psillos and Martin Curd, The Routledge Companion to Philosophy of Science. London, Routledge, 2008. 224-35. Print.
Fish, William. Perception, Hallucination, and Illusion. Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2009. Print.
Harman, Gilbert. “The Inference to the Best Explanation”. Philosophical Review, 74. 1965: 88-95. Print.
Leng, Mary. Mathematics and Reality. Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2010. Print.
Meadows, Philip John. “On A.D. Smith’s Constancy Based Defence of Direct Realism”. Philosophical Studies, 163 (2). 2013: 513-525. Print.
Poltoratski, Sonia et al. “Characterizing the effects of feature salience and top-down attention in the early visual system”. J Neurophysiol, 118. 2017: 564-73. Print.
Prinz, Jesse. “Empiricism”. Eds. Barber A. and R. Stainton, Concise Encyclopedia of Philosophy of Language and Linguistics. Amsterdam, Elsevier Ltd, 2010. 183-5. Print.
Quine, Willard Van Orman. The Ways of Paradox, and Other Essays: Revised and Enlarged Edition. Harvard, Harvard University Press, 1976. Print.
Smith, Anthony David. Philosophy of Perception. Massachusetts, Cambridge, 2002. Print.
Tarski, Alfred. Introduction to Logic and to the Methodology of the Deductive Sciences. 4th ed., New York, Oxford University Press, 1994. Print.
