David McArthur, McDowell, Scepticism and the ‘Veil of Perception’
This was a little less interesting because it was more familiar. Short version: direct realism doesn’t refute scepticism because the appeal to sense-data in traditional sceptical arguments was inessential. This story is fairly familiar around these parts, because it’s well told by (among others) Juan Comesana. McArthur’s retelling of the sceptical argument just relies on the fact that causal processes play a role in our gaining evidence about the world, something the anti-sceptic can hardly deny because it’s part of what science – the anti-sceptics best friend – tells us is true. That should sound familiar too; it’s how Quine starts Roots of Reference, though Quine doesn’t get mentioned in McArthur’s paper.