41
The secondary quality argument for indirect realism R1. When I look at a rose, I see something that is red. R2. The red thing cannot be the rose itself (since redness is a secondary quality which exists in the mind of the perceiver rather than the objects we perceive). IC. So it must be a mental image of the rose – a sense datum. C. But this means I see the rose indirectly, by seeing its sense- datum- in which case direct realism is false.

The secondary quality argument for indirect realism R1.When I look at a rose, I see something that is red. R2.The red thing cannot be the rose itself (since

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: The secondary quality argument for indirect realism R1.When I look at a rose, I see something that is red. R2.The red thing cannot be the rose itself (since

The secondary quality argument for indirect realism

R1. When I look at a rose, I see something that is red.

R2. The red thing cannot be the rose itself (since redness is a secondary quality which exists in

the mind of the perceiver rather than the objects we perceive).

IC. So it must be a mental image of the rose – a sense datum.

C. But this means I see the rose indirectly, by seeing its sense-datum- in which case direct realism is false.

Page 2: The secondary quality argument for indirect realism R1.When I look at a rose, I see something that is red. R2.The red thing cannot be the rose itself (since

In a nutshell• Indirect realism, through primary & secondary qualities,

develops a ‘two-world’ view of perception.• World No. 1 = the world as it really is. Objects with

primary qualities obey the laws of physics here in a sense-less world i.e. no colour, taste or smell.

• But it is this world, in conjunction with our perceptual system, that causes us to perceive ‘World Number 2’.

• World No. 2, the world we directly perceive, is a representation of World No. 1, the world as it is.

Written task:Create an analogy to help explain the distinction between primary and secondary qualities and how it explains how we perceive the external world.

Page 3: The secondary quality argument for indirect realism R1.When I look at a rose, I see something that is red. R2.The red thing cannot be the rose itself (since

How convincing is this distinction?

• Is it really possible to imagine an object with no secondary qualities? Can you really imagine an orange as colourless, odourless and without texture?

Page 4: The secondary quality argument for indirect realism R1.When I look at a rose, I see something that is red. R2.The red thing cannot be the rose itself (since

Objections to indirect realism

Learning objectives:1. To understand the objection that indirect

realism causes scepticism about the existence of the external world

2. To begin to evaluate indirect realist replies to it

Page 5: The secondary quality argument for indirect realism R1.When I look at a rose, I see something that is red. R2.The red thing cannot be the rose itself (since

Problem 1: How can we know there is an external world?

• Indirect realists say that all we ever perceive is sense-data.

• Sense-data is mind-dependent.• So how can we know whether anything exists

beyond the mind?

Page 6: The secondary quality argument for indirect realism R1.When I look at a rose, I see something that is red. R2.The red thing cannot be the rose itself (since

Problem 1: How can we know there is an external world?

• See Russell ch. 2, last para. on page 8 (to half way down p.9)

Page 7: The secondary quality argument for indirect realism R1.When I look at a rose, I see something that is red. R2.The red thing cannot be the rose itself (since

Can you answer Problem 1 for indirect realists? How can we know there is an

external world, even though it is perceived via sense-data?

Page 8: The secondary quality argument for indirect realism R1.When I look at a rose, I see something that is red. R2.The red thing cannot be the rose itself (since

Can you answer Problem 1 for indirect realists? How can we know there is an

external world, even though it is perceived via sense-data?

• Similarity between different sense-data suggests it comes from one thing.

• It makes more sense to say there is a stimulus.• There are changes to physical matter when

we’re not perceiving it (e.g. decaying banana). Makes more sense to say it changed whilst not being perceived.

Page 9: The secondary quality argument for indirect realism R1.When I look at a rose, I see something that is red. R2.The red thing cannot be the rose itself (since

Russell’s first response

• Read the text from ch. 2, p.9 (2nd half)

Page 10: The secondary quality argument for indirect realism R1.When I look at a rose, I see something that is red. R2.The red thing cannot be the rose itself (since

Russell’s first response

• People perceive the same thing.

• What is his concern with this reason?

Page 11: The secondary quality argument for indirect realism R1.When I look at a rose, I see something that is red. R2.The red thing cannot be the rose itself (since

Russell’s preferred response

• Look at me.• Close your eyes• Look at me again.

• What’s the best explanation for our sense-data?

Physical objects existing or not existing?

Page 12: The secondary quality argument for indirect realism R1.When I look at a rose, I see something that is red. R2.The red thing cannot be the rose itself (since

Russell’s preferred response

• See last para. on p.10- half way down p.12

Page 13: The secondary quality argument for indirect realism R1.When I look at a rose, I see something that is red. R2.The red thing cannot be the rose itself (since

Russell’s preferred response

• Summary: Saying that there is an external world (including other minds) is the best hypothesis.

Page 14: The secondary quality argument for indirect realism R1.When I look at a rose, I see something that is red. R2.The red thing cannot be the rose itself (since

Locke’s two responses

Try not to think about a crocodile.

Page 15: The secondary quality argument for indirect realism R1.When I look at a rose, I see something that is red. R2.The red thing cannot be the rose itself (since

Locke’s two responses

See page 42 Lacewing.

Page 16: The secondary quality argument for indirect realism R1.When I look at a rose, I see something that is red. R2.The red thing cannot be the rose itself (since

Locke’s two responses

1) I can’t choose my sense-data.2) My sense-data gives me a coherent picture.

Page 17: The secondary quality argument for indirect realism R1.When I look at a rose, I see something that is red. R2.The red thing cannot be the rose itself (since

To what extent are Locke and Russell’s replies helpful in relieving us from

scepticism about the existence of the external world?

Read 42-43 of Lacewing and write a half page long answer to this question

Page 18: The secondary quality argument for indirect realism R1.When I look at a rose, I see something that is red. R2.The red thing cannot be the rose itself (since

Learning objectives

• To recap the distinction between primary and secondary qualities.

• To evaluate the extent to which the distinction answers the objection to indirect realism that it leads to scepticism about the nature of the external world.

Page 19: The secondary quality argument for indirect realism R1.When I look at a rose, I see something that is red. R2.The red thing cannot be the rose itself (since

Problem 2: How can we know the NATURE of the external world?

• Summary on your work sheet

Page 20: The secondary quality argument for indirect realism R1.When I look at a rose, I see something that is red. R2.The red thing cannot be the rose itself (since

Response 1: Locke on primary and secondary qualities

• Read through your sheet

Page 21: The secondary quality argument for indirect realism R1.When I look at a rose, I see something that is red. R2.The red thing cannot be the rose itself (since

Write down an example of a primary quality of the apple.

Write down an example of a secondary quality of the apple.

Page 22: The secondary quality argument for indirect realism R1.When I look at a rose, I see something that is red. R2.The red thing cannot be the rose itself (since

• How do you know the shape is a primary quality?

Page 23: The secondary quality argument for indirect realism R1.When I look at a rose, I see something that is red. R2.The red thing cannot be the rose itself (since

Would the apple still roll off the desk if no one was perceiving it?

What does this tell us about shape?

Would its colour still be having effects if no one was looking at it?

Page 24: The secondary quality argument for indirect realism R1.When I look at a rose, I see something that is red. R2.The red thing cannot be the rose itself (since

Evaluation of Locke’s distinction

• How clear is he?

• Do you agree there is such a distinction?

Page 25: The secondary quality argument for indirect realism R1.When I look at a rose, I see something that is red. R2.The red thing cannot be the rose itself (since

How does the distinction help defend indirect realism?

Page 26: The secondary quality argument for indirect realism R1.When I look at a rose, I see something that is red. R2.The red thing cannot be the rose itself (since

How does the distinction help defend indirect realism?

• The subjective view of secondary qualities can be used to defend indirect realism – we don’t perceive the world directly.

Page 27: The secondary quality argument for indirect realism R1.When I look at a rose, I see something that is red. R2.The red thing cannot be the rose itself (since

How does it answer problem 2?

Problem 2: Indirect realism leads to scepticism about the nature of the external world (what it is like).

Page 28: The secondary quality argument for indirect realism R1.When I look at a rose, I see something that is red. R2.The red thing cannot be the rose itself (since

How does answer problem 2?

• Primary qualities are accurate reflections of reality… so SOME of our perceptions represent the world.

• The world of appearances (of secondary qualities) is a representation of the world of reality (of primary qualities).

• What’s the difference between representing and resembling?

Page 29: The secondary quality argument for indirect realism R1.When I look at a rose, I see something that is red. R2.The red thing cannot be the rose itself (since

What would an indirect realist say?• If a tree falls over in a forest, and no one is

there to hear it…

…does it make a noise?

Use primary and secondary qualities in your answer.

Page 30: The secondary quality argument for indirect realism R1.When I look at a rose, I see something that is red. R2.The red thing cannot be the rose itself (since

Explain why for Locke, extension is a primary quality. (5 marks)

Page 31: The secondary quality argument for indirect realism R1.When I look at a rose, I see something that is red. R2.The red thing cannot be the rose itself (since

Learning objectives• To know Berkeley’s critique of the primary /

secondary quality distinction• To know Russell’s response to issue 2• To evaluate whether indirect realism does lead

to scepticism about the nature of the external world.

Page 32: The secondary quality argument for indirect realism R1.When I look at a rose, I see something that is red. R2.The red thing cannot be the rose itself (since

Summary

• Criticism: On indirect realism, how can you ever know the nature of the external world when all there is is sense-data?

• Reply: We do have a true resemblence of the world via our perception of primary qualities.

Page 33: The secondary quality argument for indirect realism R1.When I look at a rose, I see something that is red. R2.The red thing cannot be the rose itself (since

Bishop Berkeley (idealist)

• What does he say about the distinction between p and s qualities?

Page 34: The secondary quality argument for indirect realism R1.When I look at a rose, I see something that is red. R2.The red thing cannot be the rose itself (since

Extension of arg. from perceptual variation

• Different animals perceive time differently.• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bc-YpWBxsHU

• How could this be used to reply to the indirect realist’s point about primary vs. secondary qualities?

Page 35: The secondary quality argument for indirect realism R1.When I look at a rose, I see something that is red. R2.The red thing cannot be the rose itself (since

Extension of arg. from perceptual variation

• Different distances affect our perception of shape and size.

Page 36: The secondary quality argument for indirect realism R1.When I look at a rose, I see something that is red. R2.The red thing cannot be the rose itself (since

5 Mark Question

• Explain why, for Berkeley, there cannot be a distinction between primary and secondary qualities.

• 10 minutes. (3/4 minutes planning time).• 5 A full, clear and precise explanation.

The student makes logical links between precisely identified points, with no significant redundancy.

4 A clear explanation, with logical links, but some imprecision, redundancy.3 The substantive content of the explanation is present and there is an

attempt at logical linking. But the explanation is not full and/or precise.

Page 37: The secondary quality argument for indirect realism R1.When I look at a rose, I see something that is red. R2.The red thing cannot be the rose itself (since

Russell’s response to problem 2

• Sense-data tells us relations btwn objects.

Page 38: The secondary quality argument for indirect realism R1.When I look at a rose, I see something that is red. R2.The red thing cannot be the rose itself (since

Russell’s response to problem 2

• Find 2 objects of the same colour in this room.

• Can we know that they are the SAME colour?

Page 39: The secondary quality argument for indirect realism R1.When I look at a rose, I see something that is red. R2.The red thing cannot be the rose itself (since

What’s your conclusion?

• If indirect realism is true, I think you can / can’t know the nature of the external world because…

Page 40: The secondary quality argument for indirect realism R1.When I look at a rose, I see something that is red. R2.The red thing cannot be the rose itself (since

Do we perceive the physical world directly?

Yes – perceive it directly No – perceived indirectly

Page 41: The secondary quality argument for indirect realism R1.When I look at a rose, I see something that is red. R2.The red thing cannot be the rose itself (since

Do we perceive the physical world directly?

Yes – perceive it directly• Replies from direct realism• Common-sense• How can something mental

represent something physical?

• Indirect realism results in scepticism.

• Berkeley: Yes – redefines ‘physical object’ as bundles of ideas.

No – perceived indirectly• Args against direct realism,

e.g. time-lagDemonstrate sense-data

• Distinction between primary and secondary properties shows that we do know the nature of the world, but not directly and not entirely representatively.