On the Concept of a Sense

Abstract

Keeley has recently argued that the philosophical issue of how to analyse the concept of a sense can usefully be addressed by considering how scientists, and more specifically neuroethologists, classify the senses. After briefly outlining his proposal, which is based on the application of an ordered set of individually necessary and jointly sufficient conditions for modality differentiation, I argue, by way of two complementary counterexamples, that it fails to account fully for the way the senses are in fact individuated in neuroethology and other relevant sciences. I suggest substantial modifications to Keeley’s account which would both solve the problem cases and make better sense of the actual classifications made by scientists. I conclude by noting some limits to the way of classifying the senses that I suggest. I conclude by suggesting that the problem I identify in Keeley’s account has arisen from a confusion that sometimes arises in the philosophical literature between how we individuate the senses and what constitutes a sense.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

References

  1. J. D. Altringham (1996) Bats, Biology and Behaviour OUP Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  2. T. H. Bullock R. B. Cowles (1952) ArticleTitleThe Physiology of an Infrared Receptor: The Facial Pit of the Pit Viper Science 115 541–43

    Google Scholar 

  3. T. DeCock Buning (1983) ArticleTitleThermal Sensitivity as a Specialization for Prey Capture and Feeding in Snakes American Zoologist 23 363–375

    Google Scholar 

  4. W. Greffrath M. I. Nemenov S. Schwartz U. Baumgartner H. Vogel L. Arendt-Nielsen R. D. Trede (2002) ArticleTitleInward Currents in Primary Nociceptive Neurons of the Rat and Pain Sensations in Humans Elicited by Infrared Diode Laser Pulses Pain 99 145–55 Occurrence Handle10.1016/S0304-3959(02)00071-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. H. P. Grice (1962) Some Remarks About the Senses R. J. Butler (Eds) Analytical Philosophy, Series 1 Blackwell Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  6. P. H. Hartline L. Kass M. S. Loop (1978) ArticleTitleMerging of Modalities in the Optic Tectum: Infrared and Visual Integration in Rattlesnakes Science 199 1225–1229

    Google Scholar 

  7. B. F. Keeley (2002) ArticleTitleMaking Sense of the Senses: Individuating Modalities in Humans and Other Animals Journal of Philosophy 94 5–28

    Google Scholar 

  8. M. Nudds (2004) ArticleTitleThe Significance of the Senses Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 102 31–51 Occurrence Handle10.1111/j.0066-7373.2004.00080.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to R. Gray.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Gray, R. On the Concept of a Sense. Synthese 147, 461–475 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-005-1334-1

Download citation

Keywords

  • Modality Differentiation
  • Good Sense
  • Actual Classification
  • Substantial Modification
  • Problem Case