Indirect realism as the more plausible perception theory
Indirect realism is a more plausible theory of perception than direct realism. Direct realism was first described by Aristotle. He described how a seer learns about an object by directly seeing it impressed on the eye. In other words, it is where external material objects are directly experienced, without sense-data (Bernecker, 2008). René Descartes and John Locke were supporters of indirect realism, the position that our conscious experiences are not of the real world, but of an internal representation. It explains that ideas of the world are only interpretations of sensory input (Bernecker, 2008). I will discuss the arguments against direct realism, then consider the arguments both …show more content…
But the activity in our brains corresponds to our experiences and can only reflect the properties of external objects to us, not show us the direct image. For example, our brain has to first flip the images we receive the right way up before we can even understand what we are seeing (Stratton, 1896).
Direct realists may have opposing views on what an object looks like, hence confusing what reality actually is. They might deny that sensory experience exists, which does not account for qualities such as colour and taste. A colour blind person may see grass as gray and believe it to be the true colour of the object, whereas another person may see grass is green (Huemer, 2011).
The argument of illusions, or conflicting appearances, suggests perceptions depend on our organs of perception (BonJour, 2013). We can understand differences in what a colour blind person sees compared to a full vision person, but it is incomprehensible to consider what a fly sees with its compound eyes or how a mantis shrimp experiences the world with their advanced depth perception and ability to see polarized light (Kilday, 2005). Direct realism does not account for people experiencing the world in different …show more content…
Primary qualities are explanatorily, without needing explanation themselves. Our sensory experience of them resembles them in reality. Primary qualities include mass, movement, and solidity. Secondary qualities are qualities which one 's experience does not directly resemble. They include colour, smell, and taste. We experiences objects both via their quality and via the different perspectives from which they are perceived (BonJour, 2013).
What colours we experience depends on the properties of the light that strikes our eyes. Colour depends on how material objects absorb and then reflect certain wavelengths of light. The denial that material objects are really coloured follows the basic logic of the representative realist position. Direct realists cannot account for secondary qualities. Indirect realism explains that we see a representation of the objects colour in our mind.
Indirect realism can also explain phantom limbs. The sensation of feeling a limb when it is actually not there is caused by irritation of nerves at the stump (Mitchell, 1871). A direct realist could not explain how a person perceives a limb to be there.
Another example that indirect realists can explain are sound waves. They cannot be perceived directly. They are only heard, interpreted, and then understood because the physical waves are transformed into ideas by our
Indirect realism is a more plausible theory of perception than direct realism. Direct realism was first described by Aristotle. He described how a seer learns about an object by directly seeing it impressed on the eye. In other words, it is where external material objects are directly experienced, without sense-data (Bernecker, 2008). René Descartes and John Locke were supporters of indirect realism, the position that our conscious experiences are not of the real world, but of an internal representation. It explains that ideas of the world are only interpretations of sensory input (Bernecker, 2008). I will discuss the arguments against direct realism, then consider the arguments both …show more content…
But the activity in our brains corresponds to our experiences and can only reflect the properties of external objects to us, not show us the direct image. For example, our brain has to first flip the images we receive the right way up before we can even understand what we are seeing (Stratton, 1896).
Direct realists may have opposing views on what an object looks like, hence confusing what reality actually is. They might deny that sensory experience exists, which does not account for qualities such as colour and taste. A colour blind person may see grass as gray and believe it to be the true colour of the object, whereas another person may see grass is green (Huemer, 2011).
The argument of illusions, or conflicting appearances, suggests perceptions depend on our organs of perception (BonJour, 2013). We can understand differences in what a colour blind person sees compared to a full vision person, but it is incomprehensible to consider what a fly sees with its compound eyes or how a mantis shrimp experiences the world with their advanced depth perception and ability to see polarized light (Kilday, 2005). Direct realism does not account for people experiencing the world in different …show more content…
Primary qualities are explanatorily, without needing explanation themselves. Our sensory experience of them resembles them in reality. Primary qualities include mass, movement, and solidity. Secondary qualities are qualities which one 's experience does not directly resemble. They include colour, smell, and taste. We experiences objects both via their quality and via the different perspectives from which they are perceived (BonJour, 2013).
What colours we experience depends on the properties of the light that strikes our eyes. Colour depends on how material objects absorb and then reflect certain wavelengths of light. The denial that material objects are really coloured follows the basic logic of the representative realist position. Direct realists cannot account for secondary qualities. Indirect realism explains that we see a representation of the objects colour in our mind.
Indirect realism can also explain phantom limbs. The sensation of feeling a limb when it is actually not there is caused by irritation of nerves at the stump (Mitchell, 1871). A direct realist could not explain how a person perceives a limb to be there.
Another example that indirect realists can explain are sound waves. They cannot be perceived directly. They are only heard, interpreted, and then understood because the physical waves are transformed into ideas by our