One of the most immediately compelling arguments against the disjunctivist position within the philosophy of perception points to the well-accepted fact that hallucinations can have the same neural cause as veridical perceptions; this is known as the causal argument. Since the main motivation for disjunctivism is to preserve naive realism, critics claim that naive realism is then incompatible with certain, well-accepted claims of neuropsychology, and, thus, disjunctivism is false. After surveying the general arguments for disjunctivism offered by Hinton, Snowden, and Martin, the causal argument is split into a stronger version and a weaker version. The strong argument relies on a narrow conception of the ‘same cause, same effect’ principle and this narrow conception is extremely controversial, ultimately entailing that mental events supervene only on the total brain state of an individual. The weak argument, which embraces a wider conception of the ‘same cause, same effect’ principle finds the disjunctivist position explanatorily redundant. The two major camps within disjunctivism, positive disjunctivism and negative disjunctivism, offer different approaches to the weak argument, and what emerges from the discussion of these two theories is that negative disjunctivism has a major dialectical advantage against positive disjunctivism, and that negative disjunctivism offers a satisfying response to the weak causal argument. M. G. F. Martin offers an insightful analysis of ‘indistinguishability’ and in doing so clarifies the disjunctivist thesis, sets limits to our understanding of our own mental states, and places the burden with the common-kind theorist.

The focus of this thesis is a certain family of ontological positions. These positions say that there is some class of objects and properties, to which both physical objects and properties reduce and which are the kinds of things we confront in perceptual experience. Though largely absent from contemporary discussions of ontology, there are various reasons to think they deserve consideration. Species of this family, and similar views, have a prominent role in early analytic philosophy. Though endorsement of these views has been systematically de-emphasized in historical work on the period, Ernst Mach, William James, and Bertrand Russell are among philosophers who endorse such views in their work. Their views were motivated by a number of different considerations. Here, I set to the side the issue of what has motivated these views in the past. I bring them up only for the purpose of giving attribution. I make no claim to ontological novelty nor will I be giving them an all-out defense. Accordingly, many considerations relevant to choice of ontology are bracketed. Instead of an all-out defense, what I offer here is an explanation of how adopting such a view allows us to solve two related problems. This amounts to two related reasons for taking a view like this seriously. One is for those who think that intuitions of a certain sort are a guide to what we should believe is ontologically the case. The other is for those who find merit in a disjunctive theory of perception. / Master of Arts

Geographic information systems (GIS) are tools used to facilitate locational decision making in interactive, graphic-based environments. GIS and interactive maps allow users to customize displays and manipulate data for accomplishing a variety of tasks, ranging from map interpretation to wayfinding and land use planning. Although originally adopted for professional use, GIS software is increasingly utilized by both expert and non-expert users. Despite the improved availability, training in cartographic design has not followed suit and studies claim that users often employ inefficient displays for task completion. Research on naïve realism indicates that people exhibit a bias for realistic depictions containing irrelevant, extraneous details, leading to increased cognitive load and decreased task performance. This dissertation explores how display realism affects decision making task performance when using a GIS. Prior studies examining naïve realism have primarily had users perform map reading and inference tasks with static displays. Natural resource management was selected as a test case because it often involves the use of geospatial tools and data and people with varying levels of GIS expertise. This research had expert and novice users utilize a GIS to perform site selection tasks for a natural resource management decision making scenario. The results indicate that increased display realism has a negative impact on task performance, especially with regards to task completion time. Individuals in both the expert and novice groups were influenced by naïve realism. It was observed that expert and novice users employed different strategies for task completion and the implications on task performance are discussed. Ultimately, the study results contribute to the theory of naïve realism and make recommendations that inform the use of task-appropriate graphic displays in an interactive mapping environment.

In this thesis I present and defend an interpretation of Kant’s theory of experience as it stands from the viewpoint of his empirical realism. My central contention is that Kant’s is a conception of everyday experience, a kind of immediate phenomenological awareness as of empirical objects, and although he takes this to be representational, it cannot itself amount to empirical knowledge because it can be non-veridical, because in such experience it is possible to misrepresent the world. I outline my view in an extended introduction. In Part I I offer a novel interpretation of Kant’s doctrine of sensibility and sensation. Utilizing a data-processor schematic as an explanatory framework, I give an account of how outer sense, as a collection of sensory capacities, is causally affected by empirical objects to produce bodily state sensations that naturally encode information about those objects. This information is then processed through inner sense to present to the understanding a manifold of mental state sensations that similarly encode information. I also give accounts of how the reproductive imagination operates in hallucination to produce sensible manifolds in lieu of current causal affection, and of the restricted role that consciousness plays at this low level of cognitive function. In Part II I turn to the role of the understanding in experience. I offer a two-stage model of conceptual synthesis and explain how Kant’s theory of experience is a unique blend of conceptualist and non-conceptualist elements. I show that it explains how our experience can provide us with reasons for belief while at the same time accounting for the fact that experience is what anchors us to the world. Finally, I return to non-veridical experience. I confront recent naïve realist readings of Kant and argue that, for Kant, the possibility of non-veridicality is built into the very nature of the human mind and the way it relates to the world.

Some things we know just by thinking about them: for example, that identity is transitive, that three are more than two, that wantonly torturing innocents is wrong, and other propositions which simply strike us as true when we consider them. But how? This essay articulates and defends a rationalist answer which critically develops a significant analogy between intuition and perception. The central thesis is that intuition and perception, though different, are at a certain level of abstraction the same kind of state, and states of this kind are, by their very nature, poised to play a distinctive epistemic role. Specifically, in the case of intuition, we encounter an intellectual state that is so structured as to provide justified and even knowledgeable belief without requiring justification in turn—something which may, thus, be thought of as given. The essay proceeds in three stages. Stage one advances a fully general and psychologically realistic account of the nature of intuition, namely, as an intellectual presentation of an apparent truth. Stage two provides a modest treatment of the epistemic status of intuition, in particular, how intuition serves as a source of immediate prima facie justification. Stage three outlines a response to Benacerraf-style worries about intuitive knowledge regarding abstract objects (e.g., numbers, sets, and values); the proposal is a constitutive, rather than causal, explanation of the means by which a given intuition connects a thinker to the fact intuited. / text

La question centrale de cette étude est celle de savoir si les expériences perceptives peuvent être conçues comme des manières d’être réellement en contact avec le monde et si elles peuvent nous fournir des raisons d’entretenir certaines propositions à propos du monde, voire nous permettre d’acquérir des connaissances à son sujet. Cette compréhension intuitive de la perception est aujourd’hui comme hier largement combattue. Ce rejet passe généralement par l’adoption d’une forme ou d’une autre d’internalisme (de la perception et/ou de la justification et de la connaissance perceptive). Percevoir serait un phénomène purement ou essentiellement interne aux sujets dotés de capacités perceptives dont on pourrait douter qu’il puisse nous permettre de croire de manière justifiée ou de connaître quoi que ce soit. Peut-on éviter cette conclusion ? Peut-on apaiser les angoisses philosophiques qu’elle fait apparaître (sans pourtant affirmer y mettre fin ou encore qu’elles n’ont aucun sens) ? Tel est le but de cette étude. L’enquête philosophique proposée ici prend essentiellement trois formes: métaphysique, ontologique et épistémologique. Une investigation de la nature métaphysique de l’expérience perceptive est ensuite mise en œuvre. L’enjeu est alors de soutenir une forme assez robuste d’externalisme de la perception (Disjonctivisme métaphysique). De la nature de la perception, nous en venons dans une seconde partie à une réflexion ontologique sur la nature des propriétés avec lesquelles l’expérience perceptive nous met semble-t-il en contact. Le réalisme de la couleur est défendu contre diverses attaques antiréalistes. Les couleurs sont des propriétés réelles des choses auxquelles on les attribue correctement. Une ontologie réaliste, non réductive et non relationnelle des propriétés chromatiques est esquissée (Primitivisme de la couleur). Enfin, les enjeux épistémologiques de la perception sont mis en lumière et discutés. Nous défendons l’idée que l’expérience perceptive, en tant qu’elle nous met véritablement en contact avec le monde (objets, propriétés, faits, etc.), est un moyen par lequel certains êtres peuvent entretenir des croyances justifiées quoique cette justification soit non réflexive et prima facie. Différentes réponses aux attaques sceptiques contre la possibilité de connaître perceptivement certaines propositions sont enfin envisagées et rejetées. Une autre stratégie anti-sceptique est proposée (une défense néo-mooréenne de la possibilité de la connaissance perceptive, et une remise en cause du défi sceptique lui-même). Finalement, à la question philosophique classique « L’esprit peut-il réellement être en contact perceptif et cognitif avec le monde ? », rien ne nous force à répondre par la négative, que cette question soit abordée du point de vue de la métaphysique de la perception, d’un point de vue ontologique ou épistémologique. Du moins, c’est ce que notre étude cherche à montrer en soulignant à la fois qu’une réponse positive à cette question est parfaitement viable, voire correcte, et que la réponse négative a, quant à elle, toutes les chances d’être passablement erronée / The main topic of this study is to discuss the idea according to which perceptual experiences sould be conceive as ways of being in contact with the world and perceptual experiences can give reasons for believing some propositions about the world and can give rise to knowledge. Lots of philosophers countervail this intuitive and naive conception of perception. This rejection is linked to the fact that they adopt an internalist conception of perception and/or justication and/or perceptual knowledge. Perceiving sould be conceive as an purely internal event of subjects which possess perceptual capacities. And so, one may doubt that they can have justifications for their beliefs or that they can know anything. Is it possible to avoid this conclusion ? How to alleviate philosophical fear that this conclusion gives rise ? That is the aim of this study. The proposed philosophical inquiry comes in three forms. In the first place, indirect conception of perception is examined and criticized. Afterwards, an inquiry about the nature of perceptual experience is pursued. The stake for us is to defend a strong form of externalism about perception (metaphysical disjunctivism). Then, in the second part of this work, we get into an ontological reflexion about the nature of properties that perceptual experience seems to acquaintance us with. Color Realism is defended against various antirealist objections. Colors are or can be real properties of things. A realist, non redutive and non relationnal ontology for chromatic properties is sketched (color Primitivism). Lastly, the epistemological stakes of perception are underlined and examined. We defend the idea that perceptual experience is a mean by which certain beings can have justified beliefs although this justification is not reflexive and prima facie. It can be so if it's true that perceptual experience puts us in contact with the world (objects, properties, facts, etc.). We examine and reject different replies to skeptical attacks against the possibility of knowing anything. Then, another strategy is proposed (a morean defense of perceptual knowledge and the questioning of skeptical challenge itself). In fact, from an metaphysical, ontological or epistemological point of view, we don't have to give a negative reponse to the classical and philosophical question "Can mind be really in perceptual and cognitive contact with the world ?" or so we think. Indeed, our study underlines that a positive reply to this question is sustainable, not to say correct, and that the negative reponse is probably wrong