Classical Theism, Philosophy, and Religion Forum / Indirect vs. Direct Realism

**Posted by jmh1001** 10/25/2015 11:17 am

Hey, all.

Can anyone recommend some good resources on indirect (or representational) vs. direct realism in perception?

I've only ever really seen this discussed in the context of the potential skeptical implications of the indirect view. It's always seemed to me that the only way to get around the skeptic's charge is to argue that something like direct realism must be true. But, sadly, this is an area that I've neglected...

**Posted by DanielCC** 10/26/2015 5:03 am

It's a foregone conclusion that yours truly will recommend Phenomenology on such occasions. With that in mind I must bring forward the esteemed Edmund Husserl, probably the greatest philosopher of perception and theory of knowledge ever to have lived.

Logical Investigations I and II
Ideas I
Ideas II

For a nice easy level introduction try Robert Sokolowski's

Introduction to Phenomenology

It's also worth going through Dallas Willard's articles (if you're pushed for time just check out those that reference ‘epistemology’, ‘intentionality’ or ‘concepts’ in the title). Willard was one of the best Anglophone Husserl scholars and dedicated a lot of time and energy to attacking the Cartesian ‘Way of Ideas’. Other than that we have:

William Fish - Philosophy of Perception: A Contemporary Introduction

(Nice introductory overview of differing Analytical approaches to perception including Sense Datum Theory, Adverbialism and Representationalism)

James Gibson - The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception

(A famous and in its day ground-breaking defence of Direct Realism drawing from Empirical Psychology, Neurology and Evolutionary Theory)

John Searle - Seeing Things as They Are: A Theory of Perception

(A recent defense of Direct Realism. Searle himself needs no introduction)

Last edited by DanielCC (10/26/2015 5:12 am)