Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://hdl.handle.net/2440/37346
Citations | ||
Scopus | Web of Science® | Altmetric |
---|---|---|
?
|
?
|
Type: | Journal article |
Title: | Sins of omission and commission |
Author: | O'Brien, G. Opie, J. |
Citation: | Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 2001; 24(5):997-998 |
Publisher: | Cambridge Univ Press |
Issue Date: | 2001 |
ISSN: | 0140-525X 1469-1825 |
Statement of Responsibility: | Gerard O'Brien and Jon Opie |
Abstract: | O'Regan & Noë (O&N) fail to address adequately the two most historically important reasons for seeking to explain visual experience in terms of internal representations. They are silent about the apparently inferential nature of perception, and mistaken about the significance of the phenomenology accompanying dreams, hallucinations, and mental imagery. |
Provenance: | Published online by Cambridge University Press 18 Nov 2002 |
Rights: | Copyright © 2001 Cambridge University Press |
DOI: | 10.1017/S0140525X0149011X |
Published version: | http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0140525x0149011x |
Appears in Collections: | Aurora harvest Philosophy publications |
Files in This Item:
File | Description | Size | Format | |
---|---|---|---|---|
O'Brien_37346.pdf | Published version | 52.15 kB | Adobe PDF | View/Open |
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.