Cargando…

Rethinking the senses and their interactions: the case for sensory pluralism

I argue for sensory pluralism. This is the view that there are many forms of sensory interaction and unity, and no single category that classifies them all. In other words, sensory interactions do not form a single natural kind. This view suggests that how we classify sensory systems (and the experi...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Fulkerson, Matthew
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4261717/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25540630
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01426
_version_ 1782348313062801408
author Fulkerson, Matthew
author_facet Fulkerson, Matthew
author_sort Fulkerson, Matthew
collection PubMed
description I argue for sensory pluralism. This is the view that there are many forms of sensory interaction and unity, and no single category that classifies them all. In other words, sensory interactions do not form a single natural kind. This view suggests that how we classify sensory systems (and the experiences they generate) partly depends on our explanatory purposes. I begin with a detailed discussion of the issue as it arises for our understanding of thermal perception, followed by a general account and defense of sensory pluralism.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4261717
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-42617172014-12-24 Rethinking the senses and their interactions: the case for sensory pluralism Fulkerson, Matthew Front Psychol Psychology I argue for sensory pluralism. This is the view that there are many forms of sensory interaction and unity, and no single category that classifies them all. In other words, sensory interactions do not form a single natural kind. This view suggests that how we classify sensory systems (and the experiences they generate) partly depends on our explanatory purposes. I begin with a detailed discussion of the issue as it arises for our understanding of thermal perception, followed by a general account and defense of sensory pluralism. Frontiers Media S.A. 2014-12-10 /pmc/articles/PMC4261717/ /pubmed/25540630 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01426 Text en Copyright © 2014 Fulkerson. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Psychology
Fulkerson, Matthew
Rethinking the senses and their interactions: the case for sensory pluralism
title Rethinking the senses and their interactions: the case for sensory pluralism
title_full Rethinking the senses and their interactions: the case for sensory pluralism
title_fullStr Rethinking the senses and their interactions: the case for sensory pluralism
title_full_unstemmed Rethinking the senses and their interactions: the case for sensory pluralism
title_short Rethinking the senses and their interactions: the case for sensory pluralism
title_sort rethinking the senses and their interactions: the case for sensory pluralism
topic Psychology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4261717/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25540630
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01426
work_keys_str_mv AT fulkersonmatthew rethinkingthesensesandtheirinteractionsthecaseforsensorypluralism