PhilArchive
open access
Naturalism and the metaphysics of perception
How does the philosophical debate between naive realism and intentionalism relate to the psychological debate between ecological theories and constructivist theories? The participants in each debate take themselves to be doing something distinctive, but I show that characterizing the distinction is difficult: the theories in both debates use inference to the best explanation to draw contingent conclusions about the constitutive nature of perception. I argue that both debates concern the metaphysics of perception, and that philosophers of perception are wrong to think that constructivist and ecological theories are engaged in a distinct and non-metaphysical task.
Conceptio Open Archive
Analyze & explore related research in Conceptio
Connect this record directly into your research workflow or AI agent. Explore citations across open repositories, query full text, and export structured proof bundles.
This document is indexed with metadata only: full text is not available in the archive for this record. Open the official source ↗
Related documents
- Agency From a Radical Embodied Standpoint: An Ecological-Enactive Proposal#766650
- A naturalistic argument against libertarian free will scepticism#114870
- The causal mind: An affordance-based account of causal engagement#80661
- Affordances and the Contents of Perception#82431
- Do Mechanisms Matter for Inferences about Consciousness?#705229
Record · ID 721114
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Bring this data into your agent: Connect via MCP or API · 20 free credits to start · no card required
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive