Abstract
Recently, several theorists have proposed that we can perceive a range of high-level features, including natural kind features (e.g., being a lemur), artifactual features (e.g., being a mandolin), and the emotional features of others (e.g., being surprised). I clarify the claim that we perceive high-level features and suggest one overlooked reason this claim matters: it would dramatically expand the range of actions perception-based theories of action might explain. I then describe the influential phenomenal contrast method of arguing for high-level perception and discuss some of the objections that have been raised against this strategy. Finally, I describe two emerging defenses of high-level perception, one of which appeals to a certain class of perceptual deficits and one of which appeals to adaptation effects. I sketch a challenge for the latter approach.
Original language | English (US) |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 851-862 |
Number of pages | 12 |
Journal | Philosophy Compass |
Volume | 11 |
Issue number | 12 |
DOIs | |
State | Published - Dec 1 2016 |
All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes
- Philosophy
Keywords
- Adaptation effects
- High-level perception
- Perception-cognition divide
- Phenomenal contrast method
- Unilateral neglect
- Visual experience