Adelaide Research & Scholarship
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://hdl.handle.net/2440/37346
| Citations | ||
| Scopus | Web of Science® | Altmetric |
|---|---|---|
|
?
|
?
|
|
Full metadata record
| DC Field | Value | Language |
|---|---|---|
| dc.contributor.author | O'Brien, G. | - |
| dc.contributor.author | Opie, J. | - |
| dc.date.issued | 2001 | - |
| dc.identifier.citation | Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 2001; 24(5):997-998 | - |
| dc.identifier.issn | 0140-525X | - |
| dc.identifier.issn | 1469-1825 | - |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/2440/37346 | - |
| dc.description.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. | - |
| dc.description.statementofresponsibility | Gerard O'Brien and Jon Opie | - |
| dc.language.iso | en | - |
| dc.publisher | Cambridge Univ Press | - |
| dc.rights | Copyright © 2001 Cambridge University Press | - |
| dc.source.uri | http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0140525x0149011x | - |
| dc.title | Sins of omission and commission | - |
| dc.type | Journal article | - |
| dc.provenance | Published online by Cambridge University Press 18 Nov 2002 | - |
| dc.identifier.doi | 10.1017/S0140525X0149011X | - |
| pubs.publication-status | Published | - |
| dc.identifier.orcid | Opie, J. [0000-0001-6593-4750] | - |
| 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.