哲学多感官知觉专题导论。

IF 1.8 4区 心理学 Q3 BIOPHYSICS Multisensory Research Pub Date : 2021-03-10 DOI:10.1163/22134808-034001ED
Amber Ross, Mohan Matthen
{"title":"哲学多感官知觉专题导论。","authors":"Amber Ross, Mohan Matthen","doi":"10.1163/22134808-034001ED","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"European philosophers of the modern period generally acknowledged that the senses are our primary source of knowledge about the contingent states of the world around us. The question of modality was of secondary interest and was very little discussed in this period. Why? Because these philosophers were atomists about sense-perception, an attitude that makes multisensory perception impossible. Let us explain. Atomists hold that all sense-experience is of ‘ideas’ — a somewhat oversimple, but still useful, way to think of these is as images. All ideas are ultimately composed of simple ideas. Atomists hold, moreover, that the intrinsic nature of a simple (or non-composite) idea is fully given by conscious experience of that idea, and in no other way. For example, burnt sienna is a simple idea because it is not composed of other ideas. Nothing about its intrinsic nature can be known except by experiencing it — a colour-blind individual cannot know what it is. It is, moreover, adequately and completely known when it is experienced; there is nothing more to know about it than is given by visual experience of it (see Note 1). Now, on this account of simple ideas, distinctions among them cannot be analysed. For atomists, inter-modal distinctions, like all other distinctions among ideas, are primitive and based in experience. What, for example, is the difference between burnt sienna and the sound of a trumpet playing middle C? All that can be said is that they are experientially different from one","PeriodicalId":51298,"journal":{"name":"Multisensory Research","volume":"34 3","pages":"219-231"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2021-03-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Introduction to the Special Issue on Multisensory Perception in Philosophy.\",\"authors\":\"Amber Ross, Mohan Matthen\",\"doi\":\"10.1163/22134808-034001ED\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"European philosophers of the modern period generally acknowledged that the senses are our primary source of knowledge about the contingent states of the world around us. The question of modality was of secondary interest and was very little discussed in this period. Why? Because these philosophers were atomists about sense-perception, an attitude that makes multisensory perception impossible. Let us explain. Atomists hold that all sense-experience is of ‘ideas’ — a somewhat oversimple, but still useful, way to think of these is as images. All ideas are ultimately composed of simple ideas. Atomists hold, moreover, that the intrinsic nature of a simple (or non-composite) idea is fully given by conscious experience of that idea, and in no other way. For example, burnt sienna is a simple idea because it is not composed of other ideas. Nothing about its intrinsic nature can be known except by experiencing it — a colour-blind individual cannot know what it is. It is, moreover, adequately and completely known when it is experienced; there is nothing more to know about it than is given by visual experience of it (see Note 1). Now, on this account of simple ideas, distinctions among them cannot be analysed. For atomists, inter-modal distinctions, like all other distinctions among ideas, are primitive and based in experience. What, for example, is the difference between burnt sienna and the sound of a trumpet playing middle C? All that can be said is that they are experientially different from one\",\"PeriodicalId\":51298,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Multisensory Research\",\"volume\":\"34 3\",\"pages\":\"219-231\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-03-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Multisensory Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1163/22134808-034001ED\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"BIOPHYSICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Multisensory Research","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/22134808-034001ED","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BIOPHYSICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
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
Introduction to the Special Issue on Multisensory Perception in Philosophy.
European philosophers of the modern period generally acknowledged that the senses are our primary source of knowledge about the contingent states of the world around us. The question of modality was of secondary interest and was very little discussed in this period. Why? Because these philosophers were atomists about sense-perception, an attitude that makes multisensory perception impossible. Let us explain. Atomists hold that all sense-experience is of ‘ideas’ — a somewhat oversimple, but still useful, way to think of these is as images. All ideas are ultimately composed of simple ideas. Atomists hold, moreover, that the intrinsic nature of a simple (or non-composite) idea is fully given by conscious experience of that idea, and in no other way. For example, burnt sienna is a simple idea because it is not composed of other ideas. Nothing about its intrinsic nature can be known except by experiencing it — a colour-blind individual cannot know what it is. It is, moreover, adequately and completely known when it is experienced; there is nothing more to know about it than is given by visual experience of it (see Note 1). Now, on this account of simple ideas, distinctions among them cannot be analysed. For atomists, inter-modal distinctions, like all other distinctions among ideas, are primitive and based in experience. What, for example, is the difference between burnt sienna and the sound of a trumpet playing middle C? All that can be said is that they are experientially different from one
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Multisensory Research
Multisensory Research BIOPHYSICS-PSYCHOLOGY
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
12.50%
发文量
15
期刊介绍: Multisensory Research is an interdisciplinary archival journal covering all aspects of multisensory processing including the control of action, cognition and attention. Research using any approach to increase our understanding of multisensory perceptual, behavioural, neural and computational mechanisms is encouraged. Empirical, neurophysiological, psychophysical, brain imaging, clinical, developmental, mathematical and computational analyses are welcome. Research will also be considered covering multisensory applications such as sensory substitution, crossmodal methods for delivering sensory information or multisensory approaches to robotics and engineering. Short communications and technical notes that draw attention to new developments will be included, as will reviews and commentaries on current issues. Special issues dealing with specific topics will be announced from time to time. Multisensory Research is a continuation of Seeing and Perceiving, and of Spatial Vision.
期刊最新文献
Multisensory Integration of Native and Nonnative Speech in Bilingual and Monolingual Adults. The Impact of Viewing Distance and Proprioceptive Manipulations on a Virtual Reality Based Balance Test. What is the Relation between Chemosensory Perception and Chemosensory Mental Imagery? Evidence for a Causal Dissociation of the McGurk Effect and Congruent Audiovisual Speech Perception via TMS to the Left pSTS. Audiovisual Speech Perception Benefits are Stable from Preschool through Adolescence.
×
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