The browser you are using is not supported by this website. All versions of Internet Explorer are no longer supported, either by us or Microsoft (read more here: https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-365/windows/end-of-ie-support).

Please use a modern browser to fully experience our website, such as the newest versions of Edge, Chrome, Firefox or Safari etc.

Why the rare Charles Bonnet cases are not evidence of misrepresentation

På svenska

Author

Summary, in English

Recently, the possibility of misrepresentation has resurfaced in the debate between higher-order thought theorists and their opponents. One new element in the debate has been the rare cases of Charles Bonnet syndrome (RCB cases), proposed as empirical evidence for misrepresentation as posited by the higher-order theories. In this article I will spell out the argument supposedly underlying the claim that the RCB cases are genuine empirical evidence of misrepresentation. I will then proceed to show that this argument relies on a hidden premise. With this premise exposed the argument cannot support the notion of misrepresentation posited by higher-order theories.

Publishing year

2014

Language

English

Pages

301-308

Publication/Series

Journal of Philosophical Research

Volume

39

Document type

Journal article

Publisher

Philosophy Documentation Center

Topic

  • Philosophy

Keywords

  • Higher-order thought
  • HOT
  • Charles Bonnet Syndrome
  • misrepresentation

Status

Published

ISBN/ISSN/Other

  • ISSN: 1053-8364