Perception Exam Questions

View of the world arguing that objections are perceived directly as they are and exist independently of minds

1) Perceptual variation

• Russell: tables look different to different people i.e colour/shape but does not actually change properties so we can't be viewing it directly; instead sense data (subjective/mind-dependent elements making up private experience)
• Berkeley: clouds look different to different people
• Locke: hands in different temperature water; impossible to tell which is correct temperature

2) Illusions - not perceiving object directly

3) Hallucinations - subjectively indistinguishable from veridical perception

4) Causal Argument - we perceive with mediums at which events arrive to us i.e light waves/sound vibrations interpreted by brain

5) Time Lag Argument - events have to be processed by brain so not perceived directly

1) perceptual variation - just bc conditions change doesn't mean we aren't perceiving the object directly + they have relational properties that change but are still the same object

2) illusions - potential for misinterpretation

3) hallucinations - we know it was a hallucination afterwards or they aren't perceptions at all

4) causal argument - if this was true, we'd be aware of the process > event

5) Time-lag argument - it can still be perceived directly, just after a little time

View that we experience sense data (Russell) caused by objects that cause mind-independent sensations that represent the external world
-> objects are made up of primary/secondary qualities

• Primary qualities: mind-independent; perceived by multiple senses; essential to objects i.e shape, size, extension, motion
• Secondary qualities: mind-dependent; perceived by one sense; inessential to objects i.e smell, colour, taste
• Used to build up a reasonably accurate portrayal of the world (two world perception: 1st being the world as it truly is using primary qualities/2nd being the world we experience via sense data and perception of both qualities
• What we're directly aware of when we perceive objections are the secondary qualities i.e colour, smell. These are mind-dependent/private/subjective so cannot be perceived directly and we use these to build up a reasonably accurate picture of world (indirect realism)
• key thinker: Locke

• nature of external world (veil of perception); if all one perceives is subjective sense data, how can we be sure perceptions are correct
  RESPONSE
  perceptions must be reasonably accurate otherwise we wouldn't have survived, RESPONSE
  animals have different perceptions so which species have "correct" perception of external world
• existence of external world; we can never be sure external world actually exists bc we only have sense data to work on
  RESPONSE
  Locke: can't choose sense experiences so there must be something external; unreasonable to not believe mostly accurate senses (Ockham's razor)
  Russell: might not be provable but "external world as best hypothesis" (Ockham's razor) bc it's a better argument to say something exists > not existing at all

• key thinker: Berkeley
• external world is dependent on the mind which ceases to exist when not perceived

1) empiricist principle of ideas coming from experience

• if we have concepts without experience, we don't really have the concepts

2) Master Argument

• in order to think of mind-independent concepts, it must be thought about in the mind, making it mind-dependent

3) distinction between qualities

• Locke's distinction was flawed bc primary qualities can suffer from perceptual variation i.e size of table varies according to length away from it + wouldn't be able to feel an apple without secondary qualities bc we wouldn't see it or touch it; secondary qualities must come into it somewhere or you are left with nothing

• if all of reality is in the mind, we shouldn't perceive hallucinations + illusions; perceptual variation doesn't fit in with idealism so we can't distinguish as to whether it's a veridical experience
• it's obvious that some things continue to exist when not perceived i.e fire becoming ashes when not observed
  RESPONSE
• Berkeley: God perceives everything 24/7
  RESPONSE
• reliance on unproven supernatural
• no reason as to why universe appears ordered
• trap of solipsism (we can never know if anything apart from our minds exist)
• in response to time as abstraction from experience of successive events + space as abstraction from body and relative positions, we can agree upon specific spatio-temporal order