Gupta on Sellars’s Theory of Perception

Recently, Anil Gupta raised several important objections against Wilfrid Sellars’s theory of perception. The purpose of this paper is to defend Sellars’s theory of perception against these objections. I admit that some aspects of his theory are problematic: for example, there are good reasons to reject Sellars’s view that the ultimate referent of a perceptual taking is a sense impression. Nonetheless, I argue that a Sellarsian account of perception is still a viable approach to perception, despite Gupta’s powerful objections.

Reply to Beall and Priest

In my “Deep Inconsistency” (Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 2002), I compared my meaning-inconsistency view on the liar with Graham Priest’s dialetheist view, using my view to help cast doubt on Priest’s arguments for his view. Jc Beall and Priest have recently published a reply to my article (Australasian Journal of Logic, 2007). I here respond to their criticisms. In addition, I compare the meaning–inconsistency view with Anil Gupta and Nuel Belnap’s revision theory of truth, and discuss how best to deal with the strengthened liar.