<p>In the late 20th century, with the rapid development of quantum mechanics and brain neuroscience, the study of perception theory ushered in a new opportunity. However, despite progress from various perspectives, there is still no general consensus on the nature of perception. Against this backdrop, Hoffman and his team, leveraging mathematical modeling, experimental simulations, and cutting-edge quantum mechanics, innovatively constructed the Perceptual Interface Theory with the core concepts of interface metaphor and the PDA loop. They argue for the non-reality of perception, analyzing the ontological and epistemological tensions between adaptive utility and representational truth in perceptual theories. They identify a key misconception in traditional perceptual theories: the conflation of adaptation and reality. From an evolutionary epistemology standpoint, they contend that under natural selection, veridical perception of mind-independent reality is not favored and is in fact likely to be eliminated; instead, natural selection favors adaptive perception. This groundbreaking viewpoint has sparked significant debate in the academic community. This paper traces the development of perception research, elucidates the core concepts and mechanisms of Interface Theory, and synthesizes three major positive implications: offering a monistic solution to Chalmers’ “hard problem of consciousness,” bridging the explanatory gap between mind and body through ontological revision, and challenging functionalism’s reductionist assumptions. At the same time, the paper presents critiques of the theory from three dimensions: Campbell, (<CitationRef CitationID="CR3">2022</CitationRef>) questioning the conceptual coherence of defining perception without truth-aptness;&#xa0;Chalmers (Journal of Consciousness Studies 2(3): 200–219, <CitationRef CitationID="CR4">1995</CitationRef>) interrogating the metaphysical commitments of the interface metaphor; Cohen (Psychonomic Bulletin &amp; Review 22(6): 1519–1522,&#xa0;<CitationRef CitationID="CR6">2015</CitationRef>) assessing the theory’s ability to account for intersubjective objectivity despite denying perceptual realism. By situating Hoffman’s theory within the dialectic of classical philosophy (Kant, James) and contemporary debates (naïve realism, enactivism), the paper aims to clarify its philosophical significance while highlighting unresolved challenges for epistemology and philosophy of mind.</p>

错误:搜索内容不能为空,请输入英文关键词
错误:关键词超出字数限制,请精简
高级检索

The Interface Theory of Perception: A Review and Discussion

  • Yang Yang

摘要

In the late 20th century, with the rapid development of quantum mechanics and brain neuroscience, the study of perception theory ushered in a new opportunity. However, despite progress from various perspectives, there is still no general consensus on the nature of perception. Against this backdrop, Hoffman and his team, leveraging mathematical modeling, experimental simulations, and cutting-edge quantum mechanics, innovatively constructed the Perceptual Interface Theory with the core concepts of interface metaphor and the PDA loop. They argue for the non-reality of perception, analyzing the ontological and epistemological tensions between adaptive utility and representational truth in perceptual theories. They identify a key misconception in traditional perceptual theories: the conflation of adaptation and reality. From an evolutionary epistemology standpoint, they contend that under natural selection, veridical perception of mind-independent reality is not favored and is in fact likely to be eliminated; instead, natural selection favors adaptive perception. This groundbreaking viewpoint has sparked significant debate in the academic community. This paper traces the development of perception research, elucidates the core concepts and mechanisms of Interface Theory, and synthesizes three major positive implications: offering a monistic solution to Chalmers’ “hard problem of consciousness,” bridging the explanatory gap between mind and body through ontological revision, and challenging functionalism’s reductionist assumptions. At the same time, the paper presents critiques of the theory from three dimensions: Campbell, (2022) questioning the conceptual coherence of defining perception without truth-aptness; Chalmers (Journal of Consciousness Studies 2(3): 200–219, 1995) interrogating the metaphysical commitments of the interface metaphor; Cohen (Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 22(6): 1519–1522, 2015) assessing the theory’s ability to account for intersubjective objectivity despite denying perceptual realism. By situating Hoffman’s theory within the dialectic of classical philosophy (Kant, James) and contemporary debates (naïve realism, enactivism), the paper aims to clarify its philosophical significance while highlighting unresolved challenges for epistemology and philosophy of mind.