Perceptual Nonconceptualism: Disentangling the Debate Between Content and State Nonconceptualism

In this paper I argue, against recent claims by B ermúdez (2007) and T oribio (2008), that within the debate about whether perceptual experiences are nonconceptual, ‘state nonconceptualism’ (or the ‘state view’) can be a coherent and plausible position. In particular, I explain that state nonconceptualism and content nonconceptualism, when understood in their most plausible and motivated form, presuppose different notions of content. I argue that state nonconceptualism can present a plausible way of unpacking the claim that perceptual experiences are nonconceptual once the notion of content it should presuppose is taken into account; and once this notion of content is clearly distinguished from the one usually presupposed by content nonconceptualism, the criticisms that B ermúdez and T oribio place against state nonconceptualism become ineffective.