Mundane hallucinations and new wave relationalism

Noûs Pub Date : 2021-12-02 DOI:10.1111/nous.12406
Jacob Beck
{"title":"Mundane hallucinations and new wave relationalism","authors":"Jacob Beck","doi":"10.1111/nous.12406","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Relationalism maintains that mind-independent objects are essential constituents of veridical perceptual experiences. According to the argument from hallucination, relationalism is undermined by perfect hallucinations, experiences that are introspectively indistinguishable from veridical perceptual experiences but lack an object. Recently, a new wave of relationalists have responded by questioning whether perfect hallucinations are possible: what seem to be perfect hallucinations may really be something else, such as illusions, veridical experiences of non-obvious objects, or experiences that are not genuinely possible. This paper argues that however well new wave relationalism may handle brains in vats, drug users “seeing” pink elephants, and other extraordinary hallucinations, it struggles to accommodate mundane hallucinations, such as “hearing” your child cry out from the room down the hall when she is actually sound asleep or “feeling” vibrations on your thigh even when your phone isn't in your pocket. Mundane hallucinations are best explained as byproducts of noise in the perceptual system, and noise-induced hallucinations are resistant to the strategies that new wave relationalists deploy to explain away other hallucinations. Mundane hallucinations can thus underpin an especially powerful version of the argument from hallucination.","PeriodicalId":501006,"journal":{"name":"Noûs","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Noûs","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/nous.12406","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Relationalism maintains that mind-independent objects are essential constituents of veridical perceptual experiences. According to the argument from hallucination, relationalism is undermined by perfect hallucinations, experiences that are introspectively indistinguishable from veridical perceptual experiences but lack an object. Recently, a new wave of relationalists have responded by questioning whether perfect hallucinations are possible: what seem to be perfect hallucinations may really be something else, such as illusions, veridical experiences of non-obvious objects, or experiences that are not genuinely possible. This paper argues that however well new wave relationalism may handle brains in vats, drug users “seeing” pink elephants, and other extraordinary hallucinations, it struggles to accommodate mundane hallucinations, such as “hearing” your child cry out from the room down the hall when she is actually sound asleep or “feeling” vibrations on your thigh even when your phone isn't in your pocket. Mundane hallucinations are best explained as byproducts of noise in the perceptual system, and noise-induced hallucinations are resistant to the strategies that new wave relationalists deploy to explain away other hallucinations. Mundane hallucinations can thus underpin an especially powerful version of the argument from hallucination.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
世俗幻觉与新浪潮关系论
关系论认为,与心灵无关的对象是真实知觉经验的基本构成要素。根据幻觉论证,完美的幻觉破坏了关系论,完美的幻觉与真实的知觉经验在内省上没有区别,但缺乏对象。最近,新一波的关系论者提出质疑,质疑完美的幻觉是否可能:看似完美的幻觉实际上可能是其他东西,如幻觉、对非明显对象的真实体验,或并非真正可能的体验。本文认为,无论新潮关系论如何处理大桶中的大脑、吸毒者 "看到 "粉红色大象以及其他非同寻常的幻觉,它都难以容纳世俗的幻觉,比如 "听到 "你的孩子在走廊尽头的房间里哭喊,而她实际上睡得正香;或者 "感觉 "到大腿上的震动,即使你的手机不在口袋里。平庸的幻觉最好被解释为知觉系统中噪音的副产品,而噪音引起的幻觉对新浪潮关系主义者用来解释其他幻觉的策略具有抵抗力。因此,世俗幻觉可以作为幻觉论证的一个特别有力版本的基础。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
From modality to millianism The censor's burden Paradoxes of infinite aggregation In defense of value incomparability: A reply to Dorr, Nebel, and Zuehl Who killed the causality of things?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1