New Phenomenalism as an Account of Perceptual Knowledge

  • Alan Hobbs
Part of the Royal Institute of Philosophy Lectures book series (RIPL)


To be an Empiricist with respect to knowledge of the natural world, is to insist that all knowledge of that world is rooted in perceptual experience. All claims which go beyond the deliverances of the senses must, in the end, be justified by, and understood in terms of, relations holding between those claims and sensory data. Crucial to the Empiricist case, therefore, is an account of how perception can be a source of knowledge. How can sensory experiences provide, for the owner of those experiences, information about objects and events which exist independently of the experiences themselves?


Perceptual Experience Sensory State Material Object Justify Belief Objective World 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    J. Bennett, Locke, Berkely, Hume (Clarendon Press, 1971) chs II, III, VI, XIIIGoogle Scholar
  2. and his Kant’s Analytic (Cambridge University Press, 1966) esp. Chs 2, 3, 8, 9, 13–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. P. F. Strawson, Individuals (Methuen, 1959) Pt ICrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. and his The Bounds of Sense (Methuen, 1966) Pts 1, 2, 4.Google Scholar
  5. 1.
    J. M. Hinton, Experiences (Clarendon Press, 1973) esp. IIb.Google Scholar
  6. 1.
    For the debate about seeing as epistemic, see G. J. Warnock, ‘Seeing’, andGoogle Scholar
  7. G.N.A. Vesey, ‘Seeing and Seeing AS’, both in R. J. Swartz, (ed.) Perceiving, Sensing and Knowing (Doubleday, 1965)Google Scholar
  8. F. I. Dretske, Seeing and Knowing (Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1969) esp. ch. 2Google Scholar
  9. G. Pitcher, Perception (Princeton University Press, 1971).Google Scholar
  10. 2.
    F. N. Sibley has some useful remarks about ‘status concepts’ in his ‘Analysing Seeing’, in Perception, ed. Sibley (Methuen, 1971) pp. 122–3.Google Scholar
  11. 2.
    On the notion of an hypothesis without rivals, see H. Putnam’s ‘Other Minds’, in Logic and Art ed. R. Rudner and I. Scheffler (Bobbs-Merril, 1972) pp. 80–2.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Royal Institute of Philosophy 1976

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alan Hobbs

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations