The comedian Lily Tomlin said that

The comedian Lily Tomlin said that reality is a crutch for people who can't handle drugs. Some
philosophers also have a low opinion of reality, seeing it as a mere construction of people's minds or
social contexts. In contrast, this chapter argues that the things investigated by science exist
independently of our minds, construed as brains. Using perception and inference, brains can develop
objective knowledge of reality, including knowledge relevant to assessing the meaning of life.
The previous chapter's conclusion that minds are brains has major implications for two central
philosophical questions: what is reality, and how do we know it? These questions are interrelated, as
consideration of what things exist needs to fit with discussion of what it takes to gain knowledge
about those things. For example, an empiricist who believes that knowledge can come only through
the senses might conclude that physical objects such as lions and mountains are not real, because we
sense only features of them, not the things themselves. At the other extreme, an idealist who believes
that reality is inherently mental might also conclude that lions and mountains cannot be said to be real
apart from how we think about them.
I think that lions and mountains are real, and so are clouds and electrons. But the hypothesis that
minds are brains does not support a kind of naive realism according to which things are just as we
perceive or conceive them to be. We know enough about how brains work to show that both
perceiving and theorizing are highly constructive processes involving complex inferences.
Nevertheless, there are good reasons to believe that, when the brain is working well, it achieves
knowledge about the reality of both everyday objects like mountains and theoretical scientific entities
like electrons. This chapter shows how brain science and philosophical reflection together support a
kind of constructive realism, the view that reality exists independently of minds, but that our
knowledge of it is constructed by brain processes.
I aim to show that constructive realism is superior to alternative theories of knowledge and reality
offered by different variants of skepticism, empiricism, and idealism. Skepticism is the view that we
have no knowledge at all, so that any talk of the nature of reality is pointless. Some ancient Greek
philosophers advocated an extreme form of skepticism according to which neither sensation nor
opinion could give us any grounds for separating truth from falsehood. An influential current form of
skepticism is found in postmodernist philosophers and literary theorists who view the world as a text
open to many kinds of interpretations, none of them demonstrably better than the others. In fields such
as history, anthropology, and cultural studies, it has become fashionable to claim that reality is just a
social construction, so that the idea of objective knowledge is only a myth. I will try to show how
objectivity is possible through the complex perceptual and theoretical abilities of our brains. Brains
are not mirrors of nature, but they are powerful instruments for representing it.
Empiricism tries to avoid skeptical problems by restricting knowledge to what can be perceived
by the senses. From early modern philosophers such as John Locke and David Hume to later thinkers
such as Rudolf Carnap and Bas van Fraassen, the restriction of knowledge to sense experience has
had strong appeal. I will show, however, that strict empiricism is incompatible both with the
neuropsychology of perception and with the practice of science. Our brain processes are, fortunately,

ผลลัพธ์ (อังกฤษ) 2:

The comedian Lily Tomlin said that reality is a crutch for people who can not handle drugs. Some
philosophers also have a low Opinion of Reality, Seeing it as a Mere Construction of people's Minds or
social contexts. In contrast, argues that this Chapter investigated by the Science Things exist
independently of our Minds, Brains as Construed. Using perception and inference, Brains Can develop
Objective Knowledge of Reality, including Knowledge relevant to assessing the meaning of Life.
The previous Chapter's conclusion that Minds are Brains has Major implications for Two Central
philosophical questions: what is Reality, and How do we know it. ? These questions are interrelated, as
consideration of what Things exist Needs to Fit with discussion of what it Takes to gain Knowledge
About those Things. For example, an empiricist Who believes that only Knowledge Can Come Through
the Senses Might conclude that physical Objects such as lions and Mountains are not Real, because we
only features Sense of them, not the Things themselves. At the Other Extreme, an Idealist Who believes
that Reality is inherently Mental Might also conclude that lions and Mountains Can not be said to be Real
Apart from How we Think About them.
I Think that lions and Mountains are Real, and so are clouds and electrons. . But the hypothesis that
does not Support Minds Brains are a Kind of Naive Realism according to which Things are just as we
perceive or conceive them to be. We know Enough About How Brains Work to Show that both
perceiving and theorizing are highly constructive processes involving Complex inferences.
Nevertheless, there are good reasons to Believe that, when the Brain is working well, it achieves
Knowledge About the Reality of both Everyday Objects like. Mountains Scientific and theoretical entities
like electrons. This Chapter shows How Brain Science and philosophical Reflection Together Support a
Kind of constructive Realism, the View that Reality exists independently of Minds, but that our
Knowledge of it is constructed by Brain processes.
I AIM to Show that constructive Realism is Superior to Alternative theories. of Knowledge and Reality
offered by different variants of skepticism, Empiricism, and Idealism. View the skepticism is that we
have no Knowledge at all, so that any talk of the nature of Reality is Pointless. Some Ancient Greek
philosophers advocated an Extreme form of skepticism according to which neither Sensation nor
Opinion could give any grounds for separating US Truth from Falsehood. An influential current form of
skepticism is Found in postmodernist philosophers and theorists Literary Who View the World as a text
open to many kinds of interpretations, None of them demonstrably better than the others. In Fields such
as History, Anthropology, and Cultural Studies, it has Become fashionable to claim that Reality is just a
social Construction, so that the Idea of Objective Knowledge is only a MYTH. I Will Show How to TRY
Objectivity is possible Through the Complex Perceptual and theoretical abilities of our Brains. Brains
are not mirrors of nature, but they are powerful Instruments for representing it.
Skeptical Empiricism tries to Avoid Problems Can be perceived by restricting what to Knowledge
by the Senses. Modern philosophers such as John Locke from Early and David Hume to later thinkers
such as Rudolf Carnap and Bas Van Fraassen, the Restriction of Knowledge to Sense Experience has
had strong Appeal. I Will Show, however, that strict Empiricism is incompatible both with the
neuropsychology of perception and with the Practice of Science. Our brain processes are, fortunately,.