Indirect Realism

Question 1

What is Indirect Realism?

Answer 1

Indirect Realism is the theory that the immediate objects of perception are mind-dependent objects (ideas/sense-data) which are caused by and represent mind-independent objects.

Indirect Realism contrasts with direct realism, where perception is thought to be of the objects themselves.

Question 2

Who was an indirect realist and demonstrated his theory through the primary/secondary quality distinction?

Answer 2

Locke

John Locke is a key figure in the development of indirect realism.

Question 3

What are primary qualities according to Locke?

Answer 3

Primary qualities are qualities that are found ‘in’ the object - part of the objects themselves.

Examples include mass, density, motion, and position.

Question 4

What are secondary qualities according to Locke?

Answer 4

Secondary qualities are qualities which are not in the objects themselves but have the ‘power’ to produce sensations in our minds when perceived.

Examples include colour, felt texture, and smell.

Question 5

How can we distinguish between primary and secondary qualities according to Locke? List the three ways.

Answer 5

1. Primary qualities are measurable.
2. Primary qualities are essential.
3. Primary qualities are accessible to more than one sense.

Secondary qualities are single-sense qualities.

Question 6

What is Locke’s argument regarding the existence of objects independent of perception?

Answer 6

Locke argued that we can infer that objects exist independently of us because of their primary qualities, which are true regardless of our perception of them.

This is a central tenet of indirect realism.

Question 7

What term does Russell use in place of Locke’s ‘ideas’?

Answer 7

Russell uses the term ‘sense-data’.

Russell emphasizes that sense-data are the direct objects of perception.

Question 8

According to Russell, what do we use to gain information about objects in the external world?

Answer 8

We use our physical organs to gain information about objects in the external world.

This highlights the role of sensory perception in forming our understanding of reality.

Question 9

What is a critique of Indirect Realism regarding mind-dependent ideas?

Answer 9

The critique is that we cannot know the nature of mind-independent objects because mind-dependent ideas cannot be like mind-independent objects.

This raises questions about the reliability of our perceptions.

Question 10

Fill in the blank: Sense-data are experienced ______, while physical objects are experienced ______.

Answer 10

Sense-data are experienced directly, while physical objects are experienced indirectly.

This distinction is crucial in understanding how we perceive reality.

Question 11

True or False: Our perceptions of objects can be measured.

Answer 11

False

Physical objects can be measured, but our perceptions cannot.

Question 12

What is the nature of physical objects according to the text?

Answer 12

Physical objects are constant and do not change.

This contrasts with our perceptions, which can vary.

Question 13

Indirect Realism Critiques

Question 14

Indirect Realism Leads to Scepticism of Mind-Independent Objects

Question 15

Indirect realism is often said to create a ‘veil of perception’. This the biggest problem for indirect realism in that

Question 16

it creates a level of scepticism about its own claims. IR claims that we know what we know via our perceptions.

Question 17

Because we only perceive sense-data and not the mind-independent objects themselves

Answer 17

we cannot know

Question 18

they exist. The sense data is an impenetrable veil that hides the objects behind them from us. But the central

Question 19

claim of their realism is that these objects exist

Answer 19

so their theory makes it impossible to know what they claim!

Question 20

There is a strong emphasis in the spec on how indirect realists can respond to this issue…

Question 21

Locke’s argument from the involuntary nature of our experience

Question 22

Locke actually used imagination to help us get around the issue of scepticism. He points out that there is a

Question 23

difference between imagining objects and perceiving them - we have voluntary control over our imaginings

Question 24

but we do not over what we perceive. This makes sense if there exist external objects that force these

Question 25

perceptions on us rather than just being purely ideas.

Question 26

Counter: There could be other explanations for what may force these perceptions onto us. If something

Question 27

else

Answer 27

such as God

Question 28

then he can be the being that forces some perceptions onto us.

Question 29

The argument from the coherence of various kinds of experience

Answer 29

as developed by Locke and Trotter Cockburn

Question 30

Trotter-Cockburn used one of the points that Locke made previously to explain why it makes sense that physical

Question 31

mind-independent objects exist. She pointed out to Berkeley (who we will look at next) that our different senses

Question 32

correspond with one another. We can even confirm and predict one sense perception from the existence of

Question 33

another (I can see fire

Answer 33

so I will soon experience heat/smell etc.) This

Question 34

objects that always bring these perceptions about together.

Question 35

Counter: as with above

Answer 35

if we can find something else that is external

Question 36

objects causing the perceptions to cohere

Answer 36

then God may be a better explanation for this than objects.

Question 37

Bertrand Russell's response that the external world is the best hypothesis

Question 38

Russell recognises the fact that it is in fact impossible to prove whether idealism or indirect realism is the

Question 39

correct theory of perception. Accepting this fact

Answer 39

he uses an inference to the best explanation. This means he

Question 40

accepts it is not philosophically certain

Answer 40

but it is justifiably the best hypothesis...

Question 41

1. Either physical objects exist and cause my sense-data or physical objects do not exist and do not cause

Question 42

my sense-data

Question 43

2. I can't prove either claim is true or false

Question 44

3. Therefore

Answer 44

I have to treat them as hypotheses

Question 45

4. The hypothesis that physical objects exist and cause my sense-data is a better hypothesis

Question 46

5. Therefore

Answer 46

physical objects exist and cause my sense-data

Question 47

Russell is using a form of abductive reasoning. This is where you look at all the appropriate explanations or

Question 48

hypotheses for a conclusion and decide

Answer 48

based on evidence

Question 49

an 'inference to the best explanation'. In relation to why it is the best option

Answer 49

all of the reasons above and the

Question 50

fact that it can explain the consistency

Answer 50

regularity etc. of my perceptions.

Question 51

Counter: But is IR the best explanation? We will go on to look at idealism and having looked at Berkeley's

Question 52

argument

Answer 52

you may decide this is a better supported theory based on the evidence (or may not!)