0% found this document useful (0 votes)
16 views51 pages

Philosophical Insights on Perception

Role of perception in legal systems

Uploaded by

mrsiddiqui021
Copyright
© All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
16 views51 pages

Philosophical Insights on Perception

Role of perception in legal systems

Uploaded by

mrsiddiqui021
Copyright
© All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

A Philosophical

Introduction to
Perception

Jonathan Pillow
Perception (PSY 323), Fall 2009
The University of Texas at Austin
What is Perception?
stuff in the world
What is Perception?
stuff in the world
percepts

process for:
• extracting information via the senses
• forming internal representations of the world
Outline for today:
1. Philosophy:
• What philosophical perspectives inform our
understanding and study of perception?

2. General Examples
• why is naive realism wrong?
• why is perception worth studying?

3. Principles & Approaches


• modern tools for studying perception
Epistemology = theory of knowledge
• Q: where does knowledge come from?

Answer #1: Psychological Nativism


• the mind produces ideas that are not
derived from external sources
Epistemology = theory of knowledge
• Q: where does knowledge come from?

Answer #1: Psychological Nativism


• the mind produces ideas that are not
derived from external sources

Answer #2: Empiricism


• All knowledge comes from the senses
Proponents: Hobbes, Locke, Hume
• newborn is a “blank slate” (“tabula rasa”)
Epistemology = theory of knowledge
• Q: where does knowledge come from?

Answer #1: Psychological Nativism


vs.
Answer #2: Empiricism

• resembles “nature” vs. “nurture” debate


• extreme positions at both ends are a bit absurd

(See Steve Pinker!s “The Blank Slate” for a nice critique of the blanks slate idea)
Let!s grant (at least some) claims of Empiricism
(i.e., knowledge comes to us through our senses)

Q: what is the relationship between “things in the


world” and “representations in our heads”?
1. Naive Realism (or “common sense realism”)
• We perceive the world “as it is”
• Our minds have direct access to reality

exact map
external of reality
reality
2. Idealism
• The only reality is that of mind / ideas
• There is no evidence for / reason to believe in an
external world

reality

?
René Descartes (1596–1650)

“Meditations On First Philosophy”,


1641

• undertook a program of “radical


skepticism”
• discard any idea that can be
doubted

• senses can be fooled


• all sense data could be caused by an “evil demon”
• concluded that the only thing he could be certain of was
that he existed. (“cogito ergo sum”)
René Descartes (1596–1650)

“Meditations On First Philosophy”,


1641

• undertook a program of “radical


skepticism”
• discard any idea that can be
doubted

• eventually convinces himself that God exists


• God wouldn’t trick us, so external world also exists
• arrives at a “dualist” theory of reality: matter and mind
are the two kinds of stuff that exist
2. Idealism

Descartes’ supposition:
reality

evil
demon
2. Idealism
Bishop Berkeley (1685–1753)
- idealist, empiricist

reality

GOD
Modern variants:

• Brain in a vat
Brain in a vat paradox

“ What is real? How do you


define real? If you’re talking
about what you can feel,
what you can smell, what you
can taste and see, then real
is simply electrical signals
interpreted by your brain.
This is the world that you
know.”

—Morpheus in The Matrix,


1999
Early Philosophy of Perception
Plato and “The Allegory of the Cave”
Early Philosophy of Perception
Plato and “The Allegory of the Cave”

• Actually used by Plato to argue against empiricism

• True nature of reality is (platonic) “forms”, perceivable


directly with the mind, not the senses.
3. Representative Realism
• We perceive the external world indirectly &
imperfectly, via intermediary “sense data”

representation
external of reality
reality

sense data
Note: idealism could never be tested or disproved

• science can!t “prove” that the external world exists


• or that we have any kind of access to it

We need some pragmatic assumptions to get started:


• there is an external world
• we have (indirect) access to it via our senses
Final issue: what kind of “stuff” is there in the world?

Descartes: “Dualism” - there are two kinds of stuff


- mental stuff (non-spatial, non-physical)
- physical stuff (possesses no mental properties)

Problem: how can the physical and mental stuff


interact?
Modern versions of dualism

“homunculus” - little man

The person who sits inside


our head and is responsible for
“perceiving” what we see.

Prevalent conception, even in neuroscience today.


Alternative theory: “Monism” - only one kind of stuff

Specically: “Materialism” - physical matter and


energy is all that exists

- challenge is to come up with a story that explains


how physical stuff can have “mental” properties
(consciousness, awareness, etc)
Philosophical position of this course:

• Empiricism - knowledge from senses (obviously!)


• Representative Realism - indirect knowledge of
world, via the senses
• Materialism - only one kind of stuff (matter)
• Functionalism - understanding the “function” of
the sensory systems is all that we need to know to
“understand” them.
From Philosophy to Framework

stimuli (input)

environment you

action (output)
“you” = an Information Processing Machine
by denition, an IPM takes input and performs
operations on that input to produce an output

stimuli (input)

environment you

action
(output)
In this course, “understanding” perception means:

1. We can write down an algorithm for how a


perceptual task is performed
(i.e., we could use it to design a robot to perform the same task)

2. Knowing where and how the algorithm is


implemented in the nervous system.
Next:

“General examples”
or
“why naive realism is
wrong”
or
“why perception is
interesting to study”
perceptual acuity test
change blindness
Lightness illusion
Comparison patch
Comparison patch
“Argument from Illusion”
• The fact that we are sometimes mistaken
in our sensory perceptions indicates that
we do not directly perceive the world
• (Naive realism is false!)
Hermann-Hering Illusion
Hermann variant
39
Eye movements
• we aren!t aware of them, but they are
essential for vision
• if you stabilize the eye, you become blind
within several seconds
Color perception
Color perception

• Is not absolute: depends on the


specic mechanisms in the eye
(photoreceptors) and subsequent
processing in the brain
Face and Object recognition
(prosopagnosia and object agnosia)

- Giuseppe Arcimboldo
Neurological decits

• Another important source of


information about perceptual
mechanisms

• “If you can lose function A but not


function B, then A and B must rely on
distinct perceptual mechanisms”
McGurk Effect
Illusions from conicting
information

• Brain sometimes comes up with


interesting percepts in response to
conicting sensory cues
Algorithms for perception

• if we truly understand perceptual


mechanisms, we can replace neural
processing with computer
processing
Cochlear implants
(using a “different computer” to transduce auditory signals)
Direct neural control of movement
- Wessberg etal, Nature 2000
Summary

• Empiricism vs. Psychological Nativism

• Naive Realism vs. Idealism vs. “Representative


Realism”

• Descartes! doctrine of “radical skepticism” (brain


in a vat, or The Matrix)

• Dualism vs. Monism; Materialism

• Homunculus (little man) - perceiver of our reality

• Functionalism - algorithms are what matter


extra credit take-home problem: 2 points
Figure 1.9 Berkeley’s exploration of how vision works

You might also like