A Test for Perception?

also ...

Press the left key to go backwards (or swipe right)

Press n to toggle whether notes are shown (or add '?notes' to the url before the #)

Press m or double tap to slide thumbnails (menu)

Press ? at any time to show the keyboard shortcuts

‘If psychologists can really identify something that deserves to be called perception without awareness, they must have an operational grasp on not only what it takes to perceive something, but on what it takes to be conscious of it.

\citep[p.~148]{Dretske:2006fv}

Dretske, 2006 p. 148

We have been clarifying what we mean by perceiving in terms of simple seeing.

But can we go further and give a ‘test for perception’?

blindsight:

infer perception from discrimination of visual stimuli

This was the point of talking about simple seeing.

You must have got information about the thing

But: allergic reactions to ragweed

What does it take to perceive something? By what test could we measure whether someone has perceived a particular object? According to Dretske, to perceive an object: \begin{itemize} \item you must have got information about the thing; and \item ‘the information in these states should be available for the control and guidance of action’; and \item ‘the information should be extracted from stimulation [...] by accredited receptor systems’ \citep[p.~150]{Dretske:2006fv}. \end{itemize}

Note Dretske’s qualification: ‘Even with the additional qualifications [not specified here], this ‘test’ for perception of an object is not going to withstand philosophical scrutiny---too many loose ends and philosophically troublesome qualifiers’ \citep[p.~151]{Dretske:2006fv}.

and ‘the information in these states should be available for the control and guidance of action’

and ‘the information should be extracted from stimulation [...] by accredited receptor systems.’

Dretske, 2006 p. 150

Keyboard Shortcuts?

Keyboard Shortcuts`?`