Searle’s Refutation of Locke’s Representationalist Theory of Perception

S. Sreenish
{"title":"Searle’s Refutation of Locke’s Representationalist Theory of Perception","authors":"S. Sreenish","doi":"10.1007/s40961-024-00330-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>John. R. Searle’s account of perception is often called the intentionality theory of perception (ITP). ITP maintains direct realism. According to direct realism, physical objects are directly perceived. Searle denies Locke's representational theory of perception since the latter is an antithesis of direct realism. Searle's contention is that, first, according to the representational theory of perception, subjective ideas (mind-dependent entities) are the only object of perception, we do not perceive physical objects at all. Second, Searle says that on the face of the resemblance thesis, the representational theory of perception is not secured because the former is insufficient to explain the latter. This paper is an attempt to reflect on these two charges raised by Searle. First, I will try to show how we can conceive physical objects are objects (indirect) of perception within Locke’s representational theory of perception. Then, it will be argued that Locke’s representationalist theory of perception can be upheld without the support of the resemblance thesis.</p>","PeriodicalId":41227,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Indian Council of Philosophical Research","volume":"18 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Indian Council of Philosophical Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40961-024-00330-7","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

John. R. Searle’s account of perception is often called the intentionality theory of perception (ITP). ITP maintains direct realism. According to direct realism, physical objects are directly perceived. Searle denies Locke's representational theory of perception since the latter is an antithesis of direct realism. Searle's contention is that, first, according to the representational theory of perception, subjective ideas (mind-dependent entities) are the only object of perception, we do not perceive physical objects at all. Second, Searle says that on the face of the resemblance thesis, the representational theory of perception is not secured because the former is insufficient to explain the latter. This paper is an attempt to reflect on these two charges raised by Searle. First, I will try to show how we can conceive physical objects are objects (indirect) of perception within Locke’s representational theory of perception. Then, it will be argued that Locke’s representationalist theory of perception can be upheld without the support of the resemblance thesis.

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
塞尔对洛克表象主义知觉理论的反驳
约翰.塞尔(R. Searle)的知觉理论通常被称为知觉的意向性理论(ITP)。ITP坚持直接现实主义。根据直接现实主义,物理对象是直接被感知的。塞尔否认洛克的表象知觉理论,因为后者是直接现实主义的对立面。塞尔的论点是:首先,根据表象知觉理论,主观观念(依赖于心灵的实体)是知觉的唯一对象,我们根本不知觉物理对象。其次,塞尔说,从相似论的表面上看,知觉的表象理论是不牢靠的,因为前者不足以解释后者。本文试图对塞尔提出的这两项指控进行反思。首先,我将试图说明我们如何在洛克的表象知觉理论中设想物理对象是知觉的对象(间接)。然后,我将论证洛克的表象主义知觉理论在没有相似论的支持下是可以成立的。
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
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
16
期刊介绍: The Journal of Indian Council of Philosophical Research encourages discussions and debates on the philosophical traditions of India and contemporary philosophy in India while simultaneously continuing its dialogue with the vast wealth of mainstream and alternative Anglo-American and Continental philosophies. Yet, the special place it reserves for philosophical expatiations emanating from the subcontinent happens to be its particular area of interest. Research and interpretations pertaining to pre-modern and modern Indian textual sources across the spectrum, viewed through an innovative lens, are highly welcome. The journal is committed to dissemination of valuable knowledge to discerning readership across the world. JICPR uncompromisingly emphasises originality of thought and research in the varied philosophical traditions. It also welcomes interdisciplinary engagements with quintessential philosophical questions. From close examination of singular philosophical texts and philosophers through furnishing detailed annotated translations and/or re-readings of extant philosophical conundrums, the journal underscores comprehensiveness of argument and ingenuity of scholarship.
期刊最新文献
An Introduction to Food Ethics: A Philosophical Pursuit The Metaphysical Integration of Upāya in the Trika Philosophy and Bhoja’s Model Based on Triguṇa-Puruṣārtha to Understand the Concepts of Śivatva, Self-Realisation and Consciousness An Exposition of the Notion Self and Identity in the Philosophy of Rāmānuja: A Critical Study Searle’s Refutation of Locke’s Representationalist Theory of Perception The Date of Ādi Śaṅkarācārya and Emergence of Śaivism as a Popular Religion in South India
×
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