structure for 'Knowledge Aims'    |     alphabetical list of themes    |     unexpand these ideas

11. Knowledge Aims / C. Knowing Reality / 2. Phenomenalism

[reality is just actual and potential appearances]

31 ideas
Everything that exists consists in being perceived [Protagoras]
     Full Idea: Everything that exists consists in being perceived.
     From: Protagoras (fragments/reports [c.441 BCE]), quoted by Didymus the Blind - Commentary on the Psalms (frags)
     A reaction: A striking anticipation of Berkeley's "esse est percipi" (to be is to be perceived).
My perceiving of things may be false, but my seeming to perceive them cannot be false [Descartes]
     Full Idea: I now see a light, I hear a noise, I feel heat. Perhaps these things are false, since I am asleep. Yet I certainly do seem to see, hear, and feel warmth. This cannot be false.
     From: René Descartes (Meditations [1641], §2.29)
If we are dreaming, it is sufficient that the events are coherent, and obey laws [Leibniz]
     Full Idea: Skeptics may doubt the truth of things, and if it pleases them to call the things that occur to us dreams, it suffices for these dreams to be in agreement with each other, and to obey certain laws.
     From: Gottfried Leibniz (On Perceptions [1680], A6.4.1398), quoted by Daniel Garber - Leibniz:Body,Substance,Monad 7
     A reaction: Leibniz flirted a great deal with phenomenalism throughout the middle of his career, as charted by Garber. Descartes made similar points. It is really only Berkeley who took this idea seriously.
Berkeley did not deny material things; he merely said they must be defined through sensations [Berkeley, by Ayer]
     Full Idea: Berkeley did not (as we are commonly told) deny the reality of material things. ..What Berkeley discovered was that material things must be defined in terms of sense-contents.
     From: report of George Berkeley (Three Dialogues of Hylas and Philonous [1713]) by A.J. Ayer - Language,Truth and Logic Ch.2
     A reaction: This seems to be a rather debatable attempt to claim that Berkeley was a phenomenalist (like Ayer), rather than an idealist. Try ideas 3942, 3944, 3945, 3957, 3959 in this database.
Berkeley needed a phenomenalist account of the self, as well as of material things [Ayer on Berkeley]
     Full Idea: The considerations which make it necessary, as Berkeley saw, to give a phenomenalist account of material things, make it necessary also, as Berkeley did not see, to give a phenomenalist account of the self.
     From: comment on George Berkeley (Three Dialogues of Hylas and Philonous [1713]) by A.J. Ayer - Language,Truth and Logic Ch.7
     A reaction: Phenomenalism involves 'possible' experiences as well as actual ones. That could add up to quite a rich and stable account of the self, as opposed to Hume's notorious introspection, which only saw an actual shifting 'bundle' of experience.
Sensible objects are just sets of sensible qualities [Berkeley]
     Full Idea: Sensible things are nothing else but so many sensible qualities.
     From: George Berkeley (Three Dialogues of Hylas and Philonous [1713], I p.154)
     A reaction: As it stands this is phenomenalism, but Berkeley eventually votes for idealism. He should acknowledge possible sensations which aren't actually experienced.
Perception is existence for my table, but also possible perception, by me or a spirit [Berkeley]
     Full Idea: The table I write on I say exists, that is, I see and feel it; and if I were out of my study I should say it existed - meaning thereby that if I was in my study I might perceive it, or that some other spirit actually does perceive it.
     From: George Berkeley (The Principles of Human Knowledge [1710], §3)
     A reaction: Berkeley is always (understandably) labelled as an 'idealist', but this seems to be what we call 'phenomenalism', because it allows possible experiences as well as actual ones. See Ideas 5170 and 6522.
There are possible inhabitants of the moon, but they are just possible experiences [Kant]
     Full Idea: That there could be inhabitants of the moon, even though no human being has ever perceived them, must of course be admitted; but this means only that in the possible progress of experience we could encounter them.
     From: Immanuel Kant (Critique of Pure Reason [1781], B521/A493)
     A reaction: This seems a fairly precise statement of phenomenalism (compare A.J. Ayer's Idea 5170). Kant calls himself a 'transcendental idealist', which seems something like a true idealist who acknowledges Humean 'natural beliefs' in reality.
External objects are permanent possibilities of sensation [Mill]
     Full Idea: External objects are permanent possibilities of sensation.
     From: John Stuart Mill (Examination of Sir Wm Hamilton's Philosophy [1865]), quoted by Michael Williams - Problems of Knowledge Ch.9
Behind the bare phenomenal facts there is nothing [Wright,Ch]
     Full Idea: Behind the bare phenomenal facts, as my tough-minded old friend Chauncey Wright, the great Harvard empiricist of my youth, used to say, there is nothing.
     From: Chauncey Wright (talk [1870]), quoted by William James - Pragmatism - eight lectures Lec 7
     A reaction: This is the best slogan for strong phenomenalism ever coined! It also seems to fit David Lewis's approach to philosophy, as the pure study of the mosaic of experiences.
Appearance is the sole reality of things, to which all predicates refer [Nietzsche]
     Full Idea: Appearance as I understand it is the actual and single reality of things - that which first merits all existing predicates.
     From: Friedrich Nietzsche (Unpublished Notebooks 1885-86 [1886], 40[53])
     A reaction: This is the view espoused by John Stuart Mill (a fact which would shock Nietzsche!). Elsewhere he laughs at the concept of the thing-in-itself as a fiction.
Russell rejected phenomenalism because it couldn't account for causal relations [Russell, by Grayling]
     Full Idea: Russell reverted to realism when he recognised that the notion of causality is problematic for phenomenalism; things in the world seem to affect one another causally in ways that are difficult to account for properly by mere reports of sense-experiences.
     From: report of Bertrand Russell (The Analysis of Matter [1927]) by A.C. Grayling - Russell Ch.3
     A reaction: This is very interesting, and doesn't seem to have been enough to make A.J. Ayer eschew phenomenalism (Idea 5170). Once your metaphysics becomes realist (like Russell), your account of perception and objects has to change too.
Where possible, logical constructions are to be substituted for inferred entities [Russell]
     Full Idea: The supreme maxim in scientific philosophising is this: Wherever possible, logical constructions are to be substituted for inferred entities.
     From: Bertrand Russell (The Relation of Sense-Data to Physics [1914], §VI)
     A reaction: This seems to represent Russell's first move (in 1914) into what looks like phenomenalism. One might ask what is the difference between 'logical constructions' and 'inferred entities'. The latter appear to have unity, so I prefer them.
Are sense-data the material of which the universe is made? [Wittgenstein]
     Full Idea: Are sense-data the material of which the universe is made?
     From: Ludwig Wittgenstein (Philosophical Investigations [1952], §401)
     A reaction: Presumably the question is meant to be absurd, and to a realist it is. You can't serious think that a filing cabinet is made of sensations.
Appearances do not hide the essence; appearances are the essence [Sartre]
     Full Idea: We reject the dualism of appearance and essence. The appearance does not hide the essence, it reveals it; it is the essence.
     From: Jean-Paul Sartre (Being and Nothingness [1943], p.4-5), quoted by Kevin Aho - Existentialism: an introduction 2 'Phenomenology'
     A reaction: This idea, expressed in the language of Hegel and Husserl, strikes me as the same as the analytic phenomenalism of Mill and Ayer. Hence I take it to be wrong.
No one has defended translational phenomenalism since Ayer in 1940 [Ayer, by Kim]
     Full Idea: I know of no serious defence of 'translational phenomenalism' since Ayer's in 1940.
     From: report of A.J. Ayer (The Foundations of Empirical Knowledge [1940]) by Jaegwon Kim - What is 'naturalized epistemology'? 303-4+n
     A reaction: We can think of Ayer as a hero who explored how far extreme empiricism would go. We still have anti-realists who are singing from a revised version of the song-sheet. Personally I am with Russell, that we must embrace the best explanation.
Logical positivists could never give the sense-data equivalent of 'there is a table next door' [Robinson,H on Ayer]
     Full Idea: Logical positivist phenomenalism has few supporters these days; ..no one ever seemed clear what the sense-datum equivalent of 'there is a table in the next room' could be.
     From: comment on A.J. Ayer (Language,Truth and Logic [1936]) by Howard Robinson - Perception IX.4
     A reaction: But do the critics know what they mean by 'there is a table in the next room'? Does it just mean 'I am hoping there is'? You can't refer to the table in the next room without sticking your ontological neck out - and that is 'best explanation'.
Material things are constructions from actual and possible occurrences of sense-contents [Ayer]
     Full Idea: The existence of a material thing is defined in terms of the actual and possible occurrence of the sense-contents which constitute it as a logical construction.
     From: A.J. Ayer (Language,Truth and Logic [1936], Ch.7)
     A reaction: Obviously we need 'possible' experiences so that unperceived trees can still exist, but it is a can of worms. Is speculation about a possible world an account of possible experiences? Realists want to know WHY we think certain experiences are possible.
Modern phenomenalism holds that objects are logical constructions out of sense-data [Ayer]
     Full Idea: Nowadays phenomenalism is held to be a theory of perception which says that physical objects are logical constructions out of sense-data.
     From: A.J. Ayer (Phenomenalism [1947], §1)
We can never translate our whole language of objects into phenomenalism [Quine]
     Full Idea: There is no likelihood that each sentence about physical objects can actually be translated, however deviously and complexly, into the phenomenalistic language.
     From: Willard Quine (On What There Is [1948], p.18), quoted by Penelope Maddy - Naturalism in Mathematics III.2
The existence of a universe without sentience or intelligence is an unintelligible fantasy [Dummett]
     Full Idea: The existence of a universe from which sentience was permanently absent is an unintelligible fantasy. What exists is what can be known to exist. What is true is what can be known to be true. Reality is what can be experienced and known.
     From: Michael Dummett (Truth and the Past [2001], 5)
     A reaction: This strikes me as nonsense. The fact that we cannot think about a universe without introducing a viewpoint does not mean that we cannot 'intellectually imagine' its existence devoid of viewpoints. Nothing could ever experience a star's interior.
Phenomenalism includes possible experiences, but idealism only refers to actual experiences [Dancy,J]
     Full Idea: Phenomenalism talks about actual and possible experiences, whereas idealism confines itself to the actual experiences.
     From: Jonathan Dancy (Intro to Contemporary Epistemology [1985], 9.5)
Phenomenalism is a form of idealism [Williams,M]
     Full Idea: Phenomenalism is a form of idealism.
     From: Michael Williams (Problems of Knowledge [2001], Ch.12)
If you gradually remove a book's sensory properties, what is left at the end? [Audi,R]
     Full Idea: If you imagine subtracting a book's sensory properties one by one, what is left of it?
     From: Robert Audi (Epistemology: contemporary introduction [1998], I p.42)
Sense-data theory is indirect realism, but phenomenalism is direct irrealism [Audi,R]
     Full Idea: Where the sense-datum theory is an indirect realism, phenomenalism is a direct irrealism.
     From: Robert Audi (Epistemology: contemporary introduction [1998], I p.43)
Phenomenalism can be theistic (Berkeley), or sceptical (Hume), or analytic (20th century) [Robinson,H]
     Full Idea: It is useful to identify three kinds of phenomenalism: theistic, sceptical and analytic; the first is represented by Berkeley, the second by Hume, and the third by most twentieth-century phenomenalists.
     From: Howard Robinson (Perception [1994], IX.4)
     A reaction: In Britain the third group is usually represented by A.J.Ayer. My simple objection to all phenomenalists is that they are intellectual cowards because they won't venture to give an explanation of the phenomena which confront them.
Phenomenalism offered conclusive perceptual knowledge, but conclusive reasons no longer seem essential [Pollock/Cruz]
     Full Idea: Phenomenalism offered the prospect of explaining perceptual knowledge within a framework that recognised only conclusive reasons; once it is acknowledged that at least induction uses nonconclusive reasons, it is no longer needed.
     From: J Pollock / J Cruz (Contemporary theories of Knowledge (2nd) [1999], §2.3.3.2)
     A reaction: I'm not sure that that is the only motivation for phenomenalism, which seemed to be attempting to get as close to 'reality' as intellectual honesty would allow. I certainly favour the modern relaxed attitude to knowledge, which needn't be 'conclusive'.
The phenomenalist says that to be is to be perceivable [Cardinal/Hayward/Jones]
     Full Idea: Where the idealist says that to be (i.e. to exist) is to be perceived, the phenomenalist says that to be is to be perceivable.
     From: Cardinal/Hayward/Jones (Epistemology [2004], Ch.4)
     A reaction: This is a nice phenomenalist slogan to add to Mill's well known one (Idea 3583). Expressed in this form, it looks false to me. What about neutrinoes? They weren't at all perceivable until recently. Maybe some physical stuff can never be perceived.
Linguistic phenomenalism says we can eliminate talk of physical objects [Cardinal/Hayward/Jones]
     Full Idea: Linguistic phenomenalism argues that it is possible to remove all talk of physical objects from our speech with no loss of meaning.
     From: Cardinal/Hayward/Jones (Epistemology [2004], Ch.4)
     A reaction: I find this proposal unappealing. My basic objection is that I cannot understand why anyone would refuse to even contemplate the question of WHY I am having a given group of consistent experiences, of (say) a table kind.
If we lack enough sense-data, are we to say that parts of reality are 'indeterminate'? [Cardinal/Hayward/Jones]
     Full Idea: The problem with taking sense-data as basic is that some data can appear indeterminate. If we can't discern the colour of someone's eyes, or the number of sides of a complex figure, are we to say that there is no fact about those things?
     From: Cardinal/Hayward/Jones (Epistemology [2004], Ch.4)
     A reaction: I like that. How many electrons are there in the sun? Such things cannot just be reduced to talk of sense-data, as there is obviously a vast gap between the data and the facts. As usual, ontology and epistemology must be kept separate.
A philosopher and his wife are out for a drive... [Sommers,W]
     Full Idea: A philosopher and his wife are out for a drive in the country. 'Oh look!' she says, 'Those sheep have been shorn.' 'Yes', says the philosopher, 'on this side'.
     From: Will Sommers (talk [2019])