hypericin

But is this distinction somehow fundamental, or just bookkeeping by the brain? I think the latter. While I can't visualize clearly, I can mentally hea...

I am referring to that which experiences, from the first person perspective. So nerves, while a part of our body, are not experienced as such. I think...

But this is factually untrue. I can, just by imagining it, picture the color "sky blue", in any environment I might be in. This suggests that the sens...

Phenomenal experience is the first person perspective on the senses. My reasoning is, if the connection between the self and phenomenal experience is ...

Phenomenal experience is direct. We perceive the world via phenomenal experience. The world is first in the chain of events leading to phenomenal expe...

Because logically these are the only possibilities. Knowing the truth, getting things right, is completely orthogonal to the discussion. If I am an ai...

There's just two possibilities: absolute certainty, or the possibility of doubt. You are placing yourself in the philosophically dubious absolute cert...

The indirection you mention happens, but it does not seem interesting or relevant to the problem of perception. The interesting part happens when sens...

We can only directly "see" (I don't like this ambiguous usage of "see", I prefer "experience".) Not true. First, to the indirect realist we see object...

No, this is a misconception. We see objects, just indirectly. Just as in another sense of indirection we see objects in a mirror. We can choose to att...

This is answering the wrong question: "what is the relationship between the world and the organism's body?" This can be direct, or indirect, per your ...

I need to be as clearer here. The verb "see" can have two kinds of targets: * Things in the world, "I see a red ball". * Our visual representations of...

Why? If the world is as it's perceived, there is no room for the world to be anything else. The only option for skepticism is to be skeptical of direc...

I don't see him claiming we have *no* access to the world, just no direct access. Indirection still allows access to empirical facts, just not absolut...

One thing we can be certain of is that is is not accuracy or reliability. No matter how indirect an information source is, it can still be accurate an...

Maps, books, the Internet, other people, are all indirect ways of knowing things. For you to be consistent you would have to forego all knowledge that...

So in your account, qualitative features of perceptions are akin to a perceptual appendage? So for instance, to touch the world I need to use my hand....

Naive realism requires that the qualitative features of perception mirror the features of reality sans perception. But they do not. They only exist du...

I'm afraid I still only have one clear answer: for perception to be "direct", naïve realism should be true. The features of our perceptions must be pr...

What counts as a direct physical interaction totally depends on context. If we are talking about billiard balls in the ordinary way, one ball knocking...

My simple example above demonstrates that indirectness does not imply inaccuracy. They are separate concepts. Maybe so. "Indirect" describes the relat...

I think it is you that is conflating accuracy and directness. Consider a photovoltaic sensor. The number on the sensor can be quite accurate. It is me...

Again, instead of violating natural language, I think it is better to respect it, and analysis it on its own terms. To do otherwise plays into Banno's...

Wow, crazy. It is hard for me to think beyond the idea that shapes can only look the way they do. For taste and smell it is easy, substitute any for a...

Smell is akin to color perception, rather than sight as a whole, which does seem to bear a non arbitrary relation to reality wrt shapes and spatial re...

I agree with this, apart from "perceive the world as it actually is"; there is no such way of perceiving.

Nope, no homunculus, that's just the conscious part of my brain.

I think this way is faithful to the way we use the word in everyday life. An indirect account of seeing acknowledges the indirection involved in the p...

Not at all. The feel of sand through your fingers and the smell of a rose are exactly as representational as their visual appearances. They are all wa...

I see "seeing" as indicating the whole process: from light entering the pupil, to the experiential representation. If at any point this process is int...

Nobody is saying that representation is the thing seen. Following language usage, objects are the things seen. But seeing is indirect. The only thing ...

So in other words, seeing is inherently indirect. Which direct realists? By not quoting anyone, and just projecting this distorted view onto all direc...

I'm not sure, you could think about the sunset itself having the quality of being beautiful, as we do of people. But I agree with your point. Some cle...

But this is naive realism. Direct realists nowadays aren't so dumb as to believe this.

I would not put it this way. I don't think indirect realists abuse language the way you say they do. To them you see objects, but seeing is mediated b...

There is no such demand. To make it would be foolish as perception is inherently indirect, it necessarily involves construction of a representation. G...

One mistake I see people making is that philosophical theories don't change the semantic meaning of everyday language. They change the underlying mode...

This is not how I would define a change in M, and it greatly complicates what should be a straightforward example. Just considering B-minimal properti...

No, why should we be?

What? Explain.

This is not true. Let M be the property of an object P being able to depress a pressure sensitive plate. You can remove or add matter to P, and M stil...

:fire:

Is this really true? While I am unfamiliar with these concepts beyond what you wrote, this doesn't seem right. To continue my example, paint on canvas...

Consider a painting of a :flower:. It shouldn't be controversial that the :flower: is supervienant on the brush strokes that compose it. You cannot ch...

But the act of saying/typing "I promise to pay you back" is identical in both cases.

Consider these two speech acts: A: I promise to pay you back B: I told @"NOS4A2" "I promise to pay you back", that sucker believed me! A and B are doi...

The "Fat Man" does indeed contaminate the problem. I know it was supposed to make convincing that one body could stop a trolley, but it is better to l...

I think the illusion of teleportation's safety relies on the transporter killing the original before, or exactly as, the duplicate is created. If it k...

I prefer a shocking twist ending: You are the fat man

This is the crux of the problem. From one perspective, the fact that there is a duplicate of you somewhere else in the world seems to have no bearing ...