Final answer:
Representative realism suggests we can know about an external world through perceptions, which are internal representations caused by objects that exist independently of our minds. Kant reasoned that our knowledge is limited by space and time — conditions of our sensibility. Russell highlighted that even direct perceptions involve inferential knowledge about the external world.
Step-by-step explanation:
Representative realism posits that we can have knowledge of the external world, as it asserts that what we perceive are not direct representations of objects, but rather internal constructs created by our sensory experience. The concept of mind-independent objects is maintained by representative realists, who argue that while our perceptions may not be the objects themselves, there is still an external reality that induces these perceptions. Direct realism contrasts this view by suggesting that we indeed have direct access to objects in the world, though this theory still allows for the occurrence of hallucinations and illusions.Immanuel Kant proposed that human knowledge comes from two capacities: sensibility and understanding. According to Kant, we experience objects by placing them in space and time, which is a necessary condition of our consciousness. However, he also posits that our knowledge cannot extend beyond these a priori categories; thus, humans can never truly know the nature of things in themselves.Bertrand Russell's epistemological distinction illustrates the reliance on inference even in seemingly direct perceptions. While we have knowledge by acquaintance with our sense data, the belief in the external cause of that data, such as a bird outside the window, is inferentially derived, highlighting the indirect nature of our knowledge about the external world.Lastly, the question of the existence of the external world and the validity of our perceptions has been debated extensively in philosophy, with figures like G. E. Moore pointing to our hands as evidence of an external reality without needing further proof, invoking common sense as a backdrop to philosophical discourse.