Its basic objects are persons, animals, and "material" things like trees and stones. It often interprets inanimate objects through a "depersonalized" lens—seeing trees or rivers as having a nature, rather than being mere aggregates of atoms.
Describes the world as it is known by science, reducing properties to physical, measurable entities (e.g., atoms, electromagnetic fields).
The tension arises because the two images appear incompatible. The manifest image includes things (like colors, free will, or purposeful actions) that the scientific image often struggles to explain or rejects as mere appearances. Key Takeaways Manifest image
Sellars proposed that modern philosophy is caught between two competing images of "man-in-the-world":
Unlike the scientific image, the manifest image is heavily charged with value, intention, emotion, and purpose. The Conflict: Manifest vs. Scientific Image Its basic objects are persons, animals, and "material"
Focuses on how things appear, with an emphasis on human experience, free will, and intentionality.
It is the conceptual framework through which humans first understood themselves as people in the world. The tension arises because the two images appear
It is not merely "primitive," but a sophisticated, corrected version of common sense. It includes empirical refinement (using induction to learn about our environment) but excludes the postulation of unobservable, imperceptible entities.