Moutoussis Konstantinos
Department of History and Philosophy of Science, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens Athens, Greece.
Front Psychol. 2016 Sep 13;7:1357. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01357. eCollection 2016.
The purpose of the present article is to try and give a brief, scientific perspective on several issues raised in the Philosophy of Perception literature. This perspective gives a central role to the brain mechanisms that underlie perception: a percept is something that emerges when the brain is activated in a certain way and thus all perceptual experiences (whether veridical, illusory, or hallucinatory) have a common cause behind them, namely a given brain-activation pattern. What distinguishes between different cases of perception is what has caused this activation pattern, i.e., something very separate and very different from the perceptual experience itself. It is argued that separating the perceptual event from its hypothetical content, a direct consequence of the way everyday language is structured, creates unnecessary ontological complications regarding the nature of the hypothetical 'object' of perception. A clear distinction between the physical properties of the real world on the one hand (e.g., wavelength reflectance), and the psychological properties of perceptual experiences on the other (e.g., color) is clearly made. Finally, although perception is a way of acquiring knowledge/information about the world, this acquisition should be considered as a cognitive process which is separate to and follows perception. Therefore, the latter should remain neutral with respect to the 'correctness' or 'truth' of the knowledge acquired.
本文的目的是尝试从科学的角度,简要探讨感知哲学文献中提出的几个问题。这一观点将大脑中构成感知基础的机制置于核心地位:感知是大脑以某种特定方式被激活时所产生的现象,因此所有的感知体验(无论是真实的、虚幻的还是幻觉的)背后都有一个共同的原因,即特定的大脑激活模式。不同感知情况之间的区别在于导致这种激活模式的原因,也就是说,这与感知体验本身是截然不同的。有人认为,将感知事件与其假设的内容区分开来,这是日常语言结构方式的直接结果,会在感知假设“对象”的本质问题上产生不必要的本体论复杂性。一方面,明确区分了现实世界的物理属性(例如波长反射率),另一方面,也清晰区分了感知体验的心理属性(例如颜色)。最后,虽然感知是获取关于世界的知识/信息的一种方式,但这种获取应被视为一个独立于感知且在感知之后的认知过程。因此,感知本身对于所获取知识的“正确性”或“真实性”应保持中立。