The intuitive case for naïve realism

References

• Allen, Keith. 2015. “Hallucination and Imagination.” Australasian Journal of Philosophy 93: 287–302. doi: 10.1080/00048402.2014.984312
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Byrne, Alex. 2001. “Intentionalism Defended.” Philosophical Review 110: 199–240. doi: 10.1215/00318108-110-2-199
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Evans, Gareth. 1982. The Varieties of Reference, edited by John McDowell. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
   Google Scholar
• Fish, William. 2009. Perception, Hallucination, and Illusion. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Foster, John. 2000. The Nature of Perception. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Foster, John. 2008. A World for Us: The Case for Phenomenalistic Idealism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Genone, James. 2014. “Appearance and Illusion.” Mind 123: 339–376. doi: 10.1093/mind/fzu056
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haddock, Adrian, and Fiona Macpherson. 2008. “Introduction: Varieties of Disjunctivism.” In Disjunctivism: Perception, Action, Knowledge, edited by Adrian Haddock, and Fiona Macpherson, 1–24. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Harman, Gilbert. 1990. “The Intrinsic Quality of Experience.” Philosophical Perspectives 4: 31–52. doi: 10.2307/2214186
   Google Scholar
• Hobson, Kenneth. 2013. “In Defense of Relational Direct Realism.” European Journal of Philosophy 21: 550–574. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-0378.2011.00462.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huemer, Michael. 2001. Skepticism and the Veil of Perception. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.
   Google Scholar
• Huemer, Michael. 2007. “Compassionate Phenomenal Conservatism.” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 74: 30–55. doi: 10.1111/j.1933-1592.2007.00002.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kennedy, Matthew. 2009. “Heirs of Nothing: The Implications of Transparency.” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 79: 574–604. doi: 10.1111/j.1933-1592.2009.00294.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Langsam, Harold. 1997. “The Theory of Appearing Defended.” Philosophical Studies 87: 33–59. doi: 10.1023/A:1002994402591
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Langsam, Harold. 2014. “A Defense of McDowell’s Response to the Sceptic.” Acta Analytica 29: 43–59. doi: 10.1007/s12136-013-0188-2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Logue, Heather. 2012a. “Why Naïve Realism?” Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society (Hardback) 112: 211–237. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9264.2012.00332.x
   Google Scholar
• Logue, Heather. 2012b. “What Should the Naïve Realist Say about Total Hallucinations?” Philosophical Perspectives 26: 173–199. doi: 10.1111/phpe.12012
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Logue, Heather. 2014. “Experiential Content and Naïve Realism: A Reconciliation.” In Does Perception Have Content?, edited by Berit Brogaard, 220–241. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Martin, M. G. F. 2002. “The Transparency of Experience.” Mind and Language 17: 376–425. doi: 10.1111/1468-0017.00205
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martin, M. G. F. 2004. “The Limits of Self-awareness.” Philosophical Studies 120: 37–89. doi: 10.1023/B:PHIL.0000033751.66949.97
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martin, M. G. F. 2006. “On Being Alienated.” In Perceptual Experience, edited by Tamar Szabo Gendler, and John Hawthorne, 354–410. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
   Google Scholar
• McDowell, John. 1982. “Criteria, Defeasibility, and Knowledge.” Proceedings of the British Academy 68: 455–479.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McDowell, John. 1986. “Singular Thought and the Extent of Inner Space.” In Subject, Thought, and Context, edited by Philip Pettit, and John McDowell, 137–168. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
   Google Scholar
• McDowell, John. 1994. Mind and World. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• McDowell, John. 2013. “Perceptual Experience: Both Relational and Contentful.” European Journal of Philosophy 21: 144–157. doi: 10.1111/ejop.12005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moore, G. E. 1922. Philosophical Studies. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
   Google Scholar
• Nagel, Thomas. 1974. “What is it Like to Be a Bat?” Philosophical Review 83: 435–450. doi: 10.2307/2183914
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pautz, Adam. 2010. “Why Explain Visual Experience in Terms of Content?” In Perceiving the World, edited by Bence Nanay, 254–309. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Price, H. H. 1932. Perception. London: Methuen.
   Google Scholar
• Pryor, James. 2000. “The Skeptic and the Dogmatist.” Nous 34: 517–549. doi: 10.1111/0029-4624.00277
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schellenberg, Susanna. 2010a. “Ontological Minimalism about Phenomenology.” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 83: 1–40. doi: 10.1111/j.1933-1592.2010.00421.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schellenberg, Susanna. 2010b. “The Particularity and Phenomenology of Perceptual Experience.” Philosophical Studies 149: 19–48. doi: 10.1007/s11098-010-9540-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shoemaker, Sydney. 1994. “Self-knowledge and “Inner Sense”: Lecture I: The Object Perception Model.” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 54: 249–314. doi: 10.2307/2108488
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Siegel, Susanna. 2010. “Do Experiences Have Contents?” In Perceiving the World, edited by Bence Nanay, 333–368. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Smith, A. D. 2002. The Problem of Perception. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Snowdon, Paul. 2005. “The Formulation of Disjunctivism: A Response to Fish.” Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society (Hardback) 105: 129–141. doi: 10.1111/j.0066-7373.2004.00106.x
   Google Scholar
• Strawson, P. F. 1979. “Perception and its Objects.” In Perception and Identity, edited by G. F. Macdonald, 41–60. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Tye, Michael. 2000. Consciousness, Color, and Content. Cambridge: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar