Notice bibliographique
Résumé
In his new book, e Metaphysics of Sensory Experience, David Papineau defends a novel theory of the metaphysics of perception called the qualitative view, on which conscious sensory experiences are only extrinsically and contingently representational and are instead constituted by qualitative elements that are fundamentally non-representational. is view, though having noteworthy similarities with both traditional adverbialism and the familiar qualia-theoretic views of Ned Block and Christopher Peacocke, represents a new and important -and unduly neglectedthird option besides the much better-known nave realist and representationalist accounts on which the contemporary debate focuses.Papineau does an admirable job of motivating the position and establishing that it should be taken seriously by those engaged in the current perception debate.e book will repay close reading by all those working on the metaphysics of perception, as well as in related areas, including, for example, the theory of mental content and the epistemology of mind.It is well-written and accessible to those without much background knowledge, and will constitute an essential resource for students and academics alike.e book is structured into four chapters, following a helpful stage-setting Introduction.Chapter engages briefly with nave realism and the sense-datum theory, and distinguishes the qualitative view from standard forms of representationalism.Chapter develops an extended critique of representationalism, presenting new and important challenges to underdiscussed aspects of that view.Chapters and develop the qualitative view in much more detail, drawing relevant comparisons with related qualia-theoretic and adverbialist accounts.Papineau rejects the sense-datum theory for standard reasons, including the well-known concern that there is no place for sense-data in a physicalist ontology (pp.-).Similarly, one main objection to nave realism is the familiar charge that it implausibly allows for phenomenally indistinguishable experiences to differ in nature (pp.-).However, insofar as Papineau's strategy is to motivate the qualitative view by means of raising problems for competitor accounts, it is worth noting that these objections aren't particularly troublesome.Austere physicalists may have difficulty locating sense-data in the material world.But more liberal theorists, who allow for a wide range of derivative items that are grounded in the fundamental physical, would seem to have less trouble.Likewise, nave realists are happy to allow that sensory states can differ in nature even when such differences are not introspectable, and this commitment is far from incoherent.Accordingly, more needs to be said if these two views are to be set aside.Notably, therefore, Papineau also presses a version of the neglected time-lag argument against nave realists (pp.-).While no less historically important than the more familiar arguments from illusion and hallucination, the time-lag argument is rarely discussed by contemporary philosophers.However, it poses a deep challenge to the nave realist view.Suppose, for example, you look into the sky and
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».