Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-2dmjx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-09T22:52:10.490Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Good science, bad philosophy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 June 2005

Jeffrey Foss*
Affiliation:
Department of Philosophy, University of Victoria, Victoria, British Columbia, V8W 3P4, Canada http://web.uvic.ca/philosophy/members.htm#foss
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract:

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the 'Save PDF' action button.

Behrendt's & Young's (B&Y's) persuasive scientific theory explains hallucinations, and is supported by a wide variety of psychological evidence, both normal and abnormal – unlike their philosophical thesis, Kantian idealism. I argue that the evidence cited by the authors in support of idealism actually favors realism. Fortunately, their scientific theory is separable from their philosophy, and is methodologically consistent with realism.

Information

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2004