TY - JOUR
T1 - Perceptual metaphysics
T2 - the case for composites
AU - Ivanov, Ivan V.
AU - Schipper, Arthur
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2024 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.
PY - 2024
Y1 - 2024
N2 - In this paper, we propose an account of how perceptual evidence might allow us to draw justified conclusions about the existence of composite objects. We call the thesis at issue PERCEPTUAL ADEQUACY, and argue that a specific, naïve realist picture of the phenomenal character of perception provides us with a straightforward way to defend it. The claim that we have empirical evidence for the existence of macroscopic composites cannot be propped up merely by the plausible claim, granted by many, that our perceptual experiences have composites-presenting phenomenology. Rather, a specific account of the nature of the phenomenology is needed so that it can provide the required evidence. We propose a way to accomplish this: one on which in the good cases it would be constituted by the presentation of the truth-makers of the relevant ontological claims. We argue, further, that this potential defence of a feasible empirically-informed approach to metaphysics is preferable to the best alternative, one based on an object-dependent version of intentionalism about perceptual consciousness.
AB - In this paper, we propose an account of how perceptual evidence might allow us to draw justified conclusions about the existence of composite objects. We call the thesis at issue PERCEPTUAL ADEQUACY, and argue that a specific, naïve realist picture of the phenomenal character of perception provides us with a straightforward way to defend it. The claim that we have empirical evidence for the existence of macroscopic composites cannot be propped up merely by the plausible claim, granted by many, that our perceptual experiences have composites-presenting phenomenology. Rather, a specific account of the nature of the phenomenology is needed so that it can provide the required evidence. We propose a way to accomplish this: one on which in the good cases it would be constituted by the presentation of the truth-makers of the relevant ontological claims. We argue, further, that this potential defence of a feasible empirically-informed approach to metaphysics is preferable to the best alternative, one based on an object-dependent version of intentionalism about perceptual consciousness.
KW - debunking arguments
KW - intentionalism
KW - naïve realism
KW - Ordinary objects
KW - perceptual metaphysics
KW - restricted composition
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85208043889&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85208043889&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1080/13869795.2024.2419652
DO - 10.1080/13869795.2024.2419652
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85208043889
SN - 1386-9795
JO - Philosophical Explorations
JF - Philosophical Explorations
ER -