Phenomenal Conservatism and Its Promises

This chapter discusses Phenomenal Conservatism (PC) and its promises as a theory of epistemic justification. It also explores common objections raised against PC including that it is too liberal, it conflicts with Bayesianism, and it runs afoul of cognitive penetration. It is argued that these common objections fail to pose a genuine threat to PC. Additionally, it is argued that there are a number of benefits provided by the appearance-based approach to epistemic justification championed by PC. As a result, this chapter shows that PC is a good starting point for theorizing about the nature of epistemic justification even though it cannot make good on all of its promises.

Cognitive Penetration and Cognitive Realism

The paper addresses the issue of theory-ladenness of observation/experimentation. Motivated by a naturalistic reading of Thomas Kuhn's insights into the same topic, I draw on cognitive neuroscience (predictive coding under Free Energy Principle) to scrutinise theory-ladenness. I equate theory-ladenness with the cognitive penetrability of perceptual inferences and argue that strong theory-ladenness prevails only under uncertain circumstances. This understanding of theory-ladenness is in line with Thomas Kuhn's view on the same subject as well as a cognitive version of modest realism rather than downright antirealism.

Perception and Perceptual Contents

I examine Aristotle’s views on the contents of perception, and how they bear on the role perception plays in our learning. I defend a broad interpretation of perceptual objects and contents, on which we perceive not just colors, sounds, and so on, but Callias, lyres, loaves of bread, and whether Callias is near, and the lyre well-tuned, and the loaf baked. I consider how this broad perception relates to the characterization of sense-perception in De Anima, and whether it depends on some sort of “cognitive penetration” from the intellect. I then consider Aristotle’s claim that our perceptions are “of universals” even though we perceive particulars, and his description of our pretheoretical apprehension of “compound” universals. I argue that Aristotle thought we could be perceptually responsive to universals we do not yet recognize as such, and that this thought informs his generous take on the knowledge possessed by those with experience.

Untying the knot: imagination, perception and their neural substrates

How tight is the conceptual connection between imagination and perception? A number of philosophers, from the early moderns to present-day predictive processing theorists, tie the knot as tightly as they can, claiming that states of the imagination, i.e. mental imagery, are a proper subset of perceptual experience. This paper labels such a view ‘perceptualism’ about the imagination and supplies new arguments against it. The arguments are based on high-level perceptual content and, distinctly, cognitive penetration. The paper also defuses a recent, influential argument for perceptualism based on the ‘discovery’ that visual perception and mental imagery share a significant neural substrate: circuitry in V1, the brain’s primary visual cortex. Current neuropsychology is shown to be equivocal at best on this matter. While experiments conducted on healthy, neurotypical subjects indicate substantial neural overlap, there is extensive clinical evidence of dissociations between imagery and perception in the brain, most notably in the case of aphantasia.

Cognitive penetration and taste predicates: making an exception to the rule

The relevance of cognitive penetration has been pointed out concerning three fields within philosophy: philosophy of science, philosophy of mind, and epistemology. This paper argues that this phenomenon is also relevant to the philosophy of language. First, I will defend that there are situations where ethical, social, or cultural rules can affect our taste perceptions. This influence can cause speakers to utter conflicting contents that lead them to disagree and, subsequently, to negotiate the circumstances of application of the taste predicates they have used to describe or express their taste perceptions. Then, to account for the proper dynamics of these cases, I will develop a theoretical framework build upon two elements: the Lewisian idea of the score of a conversation (Lewis, 1979), and Richard’s (2008) taxonomy of the different attitudes speakers can have in taste disagreements. In a nutshell, I will argue that speakers can accommodate these conflicting contents as exceptions to the rule that determines the circumstances of application of taste predicates.Keywords: Cognitive penetration, Common ground, Circumstances of application, Accommodation, Exceptions, Score of the conversation, Taste predicates.

Cognitive Penetration, Expertise, and Background Information

Can the way that an experience is caused make a difference to what that experience justifies believing? Presentational Conservatism implies that the answer to this question is no. It thereby incurs two explanatory burdens. One is to explain the apparent epistemic downgrade in cases such as Susanna Siegel’s example of Jack looking angry to Jill because of her unjustified fear. Another explanatory burden is to explain the superior epistemic position of expert perceivers such as bird watchers and radiologists whose trained eyes allow them to see more than those with untrained eyes. This chapter argues that Presentational Conservatism has adequate resources to discharge both explanatory burdens.