Acta Analytica

, Volume 27, Issue 4, pp 441–447 | Cite as

Note on Two Snowdon Criticisms of the Causal Theory of Perception


Two arguments Paul Snowdon has brought against the causal theory of perception are examined. One involves the claim that, based on the phenomenology of perceptual situations, it cannot be the case that perception is an essentially causal concept. The other is a reductio, according to which causal theorists’ arguments imply that a proposition Snowdon takes to be obviously non-causal (A is married to B) can be analyzed into some sort of indefinite ‘spousal connection’ plus a causal ingredient. I conclude that neither argument is sound. The reason that Snowdon’s critiques fail is that, since causal theories need not be about ‘effect ends’ that are internally manifest to perceivers, no such ostensibly separable, non-causal property as it being to S as if he were perceiving O need be an essential element in a causal theory of perception.


Causal theory of perception Disjunctivism Epistemology Perception Snowdon 


  1. Byrne and Logue (eds.). (2009). Disjunctivism: Contemporary readings. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  2. Grice, H. P. (1961). The causal theory of perception. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, 35, 121–152.Google Scholar
  3. Hallett, H. F. (1949). On a reputed equivoque´ in the philosophy of Spinoza. The Review of Metaphysics, 3, 189–212.Google Scholar
  4. Horn, W. (2010). Reid and Hall on Perceptual Relativity and Error. Journal of Scottish Philosophy, 8(2), 115–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Hinton, J. M. (1967). Visual experiences. Mind, 76, 217–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Hinton, J. M. (1973). Experiences: An iInquiry into some ambiguities. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. McDowell, J. (1982). Criteria, Defeasibility and Knowledge. Proceedings of the British Academy, 68, 455–479.Google Scholar
  8. McDowell, J. (2002). Knowledge and the Internal Revisited. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 64, 97–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Putnam, H. (1999). The threefold cord. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Snowdon, P. (1980-1981). Perception, vision, and causation. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, 81, 175–192.Google Scholar
  11. Snowdon, P. (1990). The Objects of Perceptual Experience. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, 64, 121–166.Google Scholar
  12. Tye, M. (2007). Intentionalism and the Argument from no Common Content. Philosophical Perspectives, 21, 589–613.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Vision, G. (1997). Problems of Vision. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.ArlingtonUSA

Personalised recommendations