The Place of Naïve Realism in Russell’s Changing Accounts of Perception

Q2 Arts and Humanities
Leopold Stubenberg
{"title":"The Place of Naïve Realism in Russell’s Changing Accounts of Perception","authors":"Leopold Stubenberg","doi":"10.18290/rf24721.2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this paper I describe the place of naive realism in Russell’s changing accounts of perception. I argue ‎for the following conclusions: (1) The early period, 1898-1910: I am inclined to think that the naïve ‎realism that Russell embraced so enthusiastically early on may not have been intended as a naïve ‎realism about perception, but as a metaphysical or semantical thesis. (2) The Problems of Philosophy ‎‎(1912): Russell abandons naïve realism (if, in fact, he ever held it) and presents a sense-datum version ‎of representative realism.  (3) “On Matter” (1912): here we see Russell’s best attempt to defend ‎something very close to the standard doctrine of naïve realism. The objects of perception—the ‎‎“everyday material objects such as caterpillars and Cadillacs”—have, of course, undergone severe ‎reconstruction. But the resulting picture does capture the spirit of the doctrine. (4) The period from ‎‎1914 to 1927: though Russell’s thinking about perception underwent some significant changes during ‎this period—the sense datum theory is replaced by neutral monism—I try to show that the ‎distinction between the matter of physics and the thing of common sense is a constant feature of ‎Russell’s changing views. And I suggest that our perceptual relation the thing of common ‎sense (as logically reconstructed by Russell) can usefully be viewed as a limited sort of naïve realism. ‎‎(5) The period after 1927: the thing of common sense no longer features in Russell’s account of our ‎perceptual access to the world. The things we perceive are percepts, located in our private spaces. The ‎only material objects of which these percepts are parts are our brains. All other material objects are ‎beyond our perceptual reach and are accessible only via inference. This is the end of anything ‎resembling the traditional view of naïve realism in Russell’s account of perception. ‎","PeriodicalId":35732,"journal":{"name":"Roczniki Filozoficzne","volume":"13 11","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Roczniki Filozoficzne","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18290/rf24721.2","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In this paper I describe the place of naive realism in Russell’s changing accounts of perception. I argue ‎for the following conclusions: (1) The early period, 1898-1910: I am inclined to think that the naïve ‎realism that Russell embraced so enthusiastically early on may not have been intended as a naïve ‎realism about perception, but as a metaphysical or semantical thesis. (2) The Problems of Philosophy ‎‎(1912): Russell abandons naïve realism (if, in fact, he ever held it) and presents a sense-datum version ‎of representative realism.  (3) “On Matter” (1912): here we see Russell’s best attempt to defend ‎something very close to the standard doctrine of naïve realism. The objects of perception—the ‎‎“everyday material objects such as caterpillars and Cadillacs”—have, of course, undergone severe ‎reconstruction. But the resulting picture does capture the spirit of the doctrine. (4) The period from ‎‎1914 to 1927: though Russell’s thinking about perception underwent some significant changes during ‎this period—the sense datum theory is replaced by neutral monism—I try to show that the ‎distinction between the matter of physics and the thing of common sense is a constant feature of ‎Russell’s changing views. And I suggest that our perceptual relation the thing of common ‎sense (as logically reconstructed by Russell) can usefully be viewed as a limited sort of naïve realism. ‎‎(5) The period after 1927: the thing of common sense no longer features in Russell’s account of our ‎perceptual access to the world. The things we perceive are percepts, located in our private spaces. The ‎only material objects of which these percepts are parts are our brains. All other material objects are ‎beyond our perceptual reach and are accessible only via inference. This is the end of anything ‎resembling the traditional view of naïve realism in Russell’s account of perception. ‎
天真现实主义在罗素不断变化的知觉论中的地位
在本文中,我描述了天真现实主义在罗素不断变化的知觉论述中的地位。我论证了以下结论:(1)早期,1898-1910 年:我倾向于认为,罗素早期热情拥抱的天真现实主义可能并不是作为关于知觉的天真现实主义,而是作为形而上学或语义学的论题。(2) 《哲学问题》(1912 年):罗素放弃了天真的现实主义(如果事实上他曾经坚持过的话),提出了代表现实主义的感性数据版本。 (3) 《论物质》(1912 年):在这里,我们看到了罗素为捍卫某种非常接近于天真现实主义标准学说的东西所做的最佳尝试。感知的对象--"日常的物质对象,如毛毛虫和凯迪拉克"--当然经过了严格的重构。但最终的画面确实体现了这一学说的精神。(4) 从1914年到1927年:虽然罗素关于知觉的思想在这一时期发生了一些重大变化--感觉基准论被中性一元论所取代--但我试图表明,物理学问题与常识问题之间的区别是罗素不断变化的观点的一个恒定特征。我认为,我们的知觉关系--常识之物(如罗素在逻辑上重建的那样)--可以被视为一种有限的天真现实主义。(5) 1927 年之后的时期:常识之物不再是罗素关于我们对世界的感知通路的论述的特征。我们感知的事物是位于我们私人空间中的知觉。这些感知的唯一物质对象是我们的大脑。所有其他的物质对象都超出了我们的感知范围,只能通过推理才能获得。这就是罗素关于知觉的论述中任何类似于传统的天真现实主义观点的终结。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Roczniki Filozoficzne
Roczniki Filozoficzne Arts and Humanities-Philosophy
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
56
期刊介绍: Annals of Philosophy is one of the oldest philosophical journals in Poland (since 1948). It is published four times per year in both the online and traditional ways. The journal aims to publish the best original research papers in philosophy, as well as translations, reviews, accounts and polemics.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信