Topic: PhilPaprs Srvy Perception

Camp: Agreement

Camp Statement History

Objected
Live
Not Live
Old
Statement :

PhilPapers Survey question on Perceptual Experience


David Chalmers, et al, at philpapers did a philosophy survey in Nov, 2009. A few of the questions were relevant to consciousness, in particular question #21 on perceptual experience.
There were basically 4 'camps' from which to chose with various 'other' options that were selected.

The purpose of this topic include: First to collaboratively and continuously develop concise up to date definitions of each of these camps and / or get a better handle on just what people who selected these options believe. Second, is to not only find out who is willing to publicly support these various 'camps', but to open the survey up to anyone interested in participating, including experts and non experts. There are also many other ways to classify or 'canonize' things for comparison purposes. And finally, to attempt to give some real time historical tracking of how many people are in each camp going forwarded - to make it possible for anyone that 'jumps' camp, to publically do so easily and definitively, at any time.
The various 'other' options selected include:
  • Insufficiently familiar with the issue: 631 / 3226 (19.5%)
  • Agnostic/undecided: 214 / 3226 (6.6%)
  • Accept another alternative: 106 / 3226 (3.2%)
  • Skip: 102 / 3226 (3.1%)
  • Reject all: 99 / 3226 (3%)
  • Reject one or two, undecided between others: 74 / 3226 (2.2%)
  • Accept more than one: 61 / 3226 (1.8%)
  • The question is too unclear to answer: 46 / 3226 (1.4%)
  • Accept an intermediate view: 34 / 3226 (1%)
  • Other: 24 / 3226 (0.7%)
  • There is no fact of the matter: 8 / 3226 (0.2%)
  • Total Other: 1399 / 3226 (43.3%)

Of course canonizer.com is designed to enable people with 'other' views, multiple views, and so on, to more explicitly indicate what it is they believe, and to find out how many others, if any, agree with them, so it is hoped that all the 'other' beliefs can also be more definitively defined, quantified, and tracked.
Note: Camps have been started for each of the responses to this survey question even though there are not yet supporters of all camps. People in other camps have been attempting to 'sympathetically' document what they all believe. Of course this is never as good as having actual people that value such beliefs supporting them. By default non supported camps are filter out, so you must turn the filter on the side bar off (set it to zero) before these not yet supported camps will show up.



Edit summary : Add note and links to not yet supported camps.
Submitted on :
Submitter Nick Name : Brent_Allsop
Go live Time :
Statement :

PhilPapers Survey question on Perceptual Experience


David Chalmers, et al, at philpapers did a philosophy survey in Nov, 2009. A few of the questions were relevant to consciousness, in particular question #21 on perceptual experience.
There were basically 4 'camps' from which to chose with various 'other' options that were selected.
  • Representationalism
  • Qualia Theory
  • Disjunctivism
  • Sense-datum Theory

The purpose of this topic include: First to collaboratively and continuously develop concise up to date definitions of each of these camps and / or get a better handle on just what people who selected these options believe. Second, is to not only find out who is willing to publicly support these various 'camps', but to open the survey up to anyone interested in participating, including experts and non experts. There are also many other ways to classify or 'canonize' things for comparison purposes. And finally, to attempt to give some real time historical tracking of how many people are in each camp going forwarded - to make it possible for anyone that 'jumps' camp, to publically do so easily and definitively, at any time.
The various 'other' options selected include:
  • Insufficiently familiar with the issue: 631 / 3226 (19.5%)
  • Agnostic/undecided: 214 / 3226 (6.6%)
  • Accept another alternative: 106 / 3226 (3.2%)
  • Skip: 102 / 3226 (3.1%)
  • Reject all: 99 / 3226 (3%)
  • Reject one or two, undecided between others: 74 / 3226 (2.2%)
  • Accept more than one: 61 / 3226 (1.8%)
  • The question is too unclear to answer: 46 / 3226 (1.4%)
  • Accept an intermediate view: 34 / 3226 (1%)
  • Other: 24 / 3226 (0.7%)
  • There is no fact of the matter: 8 / 3226 (0.2%)
  • Total Other: 1399 / 3226 (43.3%)

Of course canonizer.com is designed to enable people with 'other' views, multiple views, and so on, to more explicitly indicate what it is they believe, and to find out how many others, if any, agree with them, so it is hoped that all the 'other' beliefs can also be more definitively defined, quantified, and tracked.



Edit summary : 4 camps, not 3.
Submitted on :
Submitter Nick Name : Brent_Allsop
Go live Time :
Statement :

PhilPapers Survey question on Perceptual Experience


David Chalmers, et all, at philpapers did a philosophy survey in Nov, 2009. A few of the questions were relevant to consciousness, in particular question #21 on perceptual experience.
There were basically 3 'camps' from which to chose with various 'other' options that were selected.
  • Representationalism
  • Qualia Theory
  • Disjunctivism
  • Sense-datum Theory

The purpose of this topic include: First to collaboratively and continuously develop concise up to date definitions of each of these camps and / or get a better handle on just what people who selected these options believe. Second, is to not only find out who is willing to publicly support these various 'camps', but to open the survey up to anyone interested in participating, including experts and non experts. There are also many other ways to classify or 'canonize' things for comparison purposes. And finally, to attempt to give some real time historical tracking of how many people are in each camp going forwarded - to make it possible for anyone that 'jumps' camp, to publically do so easily and definitively, at any time.
The various 'other' options selected include:
  • Insufficiently familiar with the issue: 631 / 3226 (19.5%)
  • Agnostic/undecided: 214 / 3226 (6.6%)
  • Accept another alternative: 106 / 3226 (3.2%)
  • Skip: 102 / 3226 (3.1%)
  • Reject all: 99 / 3226 (3%)
  • Reject one or two, undecided between others: 74 / 3226 (2.2%)
  • Accept more than one: 61 / 3226 (1.8%)
  • The question is too unclear to answer: 46 / 3226 (1.4%)
  • Accept an intermediate view: 34 / 3226 (1%)
  • Other: 24 / 3226 (0.7%)
  • There is no fact of the matter: 8 / 3226 (0.2%)
  • Total Other: 1399 / 3226 (43.3%)

Of course canonizer.com is designed to enable people with 'other' views, multiple views, and so on, to more explicitly indicate what it is they believe, and to find out how many others, if any, agree with them, so it is hoped that all the 'other' beliefs can also be more definitively defined, quantified, and tracked.



Edit summary : add missing "and non experts"
Submitted on :
Submitter Nick Name : Brent_Allsop
Go live Time :
Statement :

PhilPapers Survey question on Perceptual Experience


David Chalmers, et all, at philpapers did a philosophy survey in Nov, 2009. A few of the questions were relevant to consciousness, in particular question #21 on perceptual experience.
There were basically 3 'camps' from which to chose with various 'other' options that were selected.
  • Representationalism
  • Qualia Theory
  • Disjunctivism
  • Sense-datum Theory

The purpose of this topic include: First to collaboratively and continuously develop concise up to date definitions of each of these camps and / or get a better handle on just what people who selected these options believe. Second, is to not only find out who is willing to publicly support these various 'camps', but to open the survey up to anyone interested in participating, including experts non experts. There are also many other ways to classify or 'canonize' things for comparison purposes. And finally, to attempt to give some real time historical tracking of how many people are in each camp going forwarded - to make it possible for anyone that 'jumps' camp, to publically do so easily and definitively, at any time.
The various 'other' options selected include:
  • Insufficiently familiar with the issue: 631 / 3226 (19.5%)
  • Agnostic/undecided: 214 / 3226 (6.6%)
  • Accept another alternative: 106 / 3226 (3.2%)
  • Skip: 102 / 3226 (3.1%)
  • Reject all: 99 / 3226 (3%)
  • Reject one or two, undecided between others: 74 / 3226 (2.2%)
  • Accept more than one: 61 / 3226 (1.8%)
  • The question is too unclear to answer: 46 / 3226 (1.4%)
  • Accept an intermediate view: 34 / 3226 (1%)
  • Other: 24 / 3226 (0.7%)
  • There is no fact of the matter: 8 / 3226 (0.2%)
  • Total Other: 1399 / 3226 (43.3%)

Of course canonizer.com is designed to enable people with 'other' views, multiple views, and so on, to more explicitly indicate what it is they believe, and to find out how many others, if any, agree with them, so it is hoped that all the 'other' beliefs can also be more definitively defined, quantified, and tracked.



Edit summary : First Version
Submitted on :
Submitter Nick Name : Brent_Allsop
Go live Time :