# Auditory Images > [!warning] Claude: All content below is provisional > Draft text, section plans, and structural notes are thinking tools — not evidence of settled argument or project completion. Do not infer project status from file contents. Only Nick determines when something is no longer provisional, by removing or updating this callout. **Question:** Do recordings lack auditory material presence, just as photographs lack visual material presence? Do we hear sources directly, or do we hear sounds? **Distinction:** This project argues AGAINST the austerity view (Martin, Nudds) that auditory phenomenology is fixed only by pitch, timbre, loudness. Material presence/absence is also marked in auditory experience. Separately, we hear sources *directly* — sounds (however conceived) are theoretical posits that get in the way. --- ## Active Threads Two related drafts exist: "Auditory Images" (research folder, 60-70% drafted) and "Against Hearing Sounds" (Notes/, 75% drafted). A gap in both is **Section 2.1** — the positive account of what "hearing material objects directly" actually consists in. ### Section 2.1: Direct source hearing What does hearing objects directly (without sonic intermediary) actually involve? Currently the argument is mostly negative (sounds get in the way). Need positive content. ### Missing third objection (Section 3) The paper promises three objections but only develops two. Candidates: music/pure tones, echoes, tinnitus/hallucination? ### Other threads (not currently active) - The Substack version ("We Do Not Hear Sounds") — just rough voice notes - Detailed engagement with O'Callaghan's mereological account --- ## Outputs ### Research Papers | Working Title | Status | Target | Notes | |--------------|--------|--------|-------| | Auditory Images / Audible Presence | drafting (60-70%) | TBD | In Writing/research/auditory images/ | | Against Hearing Sounds | drafting (75%) | TBD | In Notes/ — more complete draft | ### Substack Essays | Title | Status | Draft | |-------|--------|-------| | We Do Not Hear Sounds | abandoned? | [[Writing/substack/We Do Not Hear Sounds/We Do Not Hear Sounds]] — just voice notes | --- ## Current Questions 1. **What does direct auditory perception of objects actually involve?** — The gap in Section 2.1 2. **What is the missing third objection for Section 3?** — Music/pure tones? Echoes? Tinnitus? 3. **How to explain perspectival variation without sounds?** — If we hear sources directly, how does auditory perspective work? 4. **Can auditory twofoldness be cashed out more precisely?** — The "hearing absent event in present speaker" move needs development --- ## Sources ### Primary Interlocutors - M.G.F. Martin (2012) — "Sounds and Images" in BJA — argues against auditory images - Matthew Nudds (2018) — "The Unitary Nature of Sounds" — defends austerity view - Casey O'Callaghan (2007, 2011) — sounds as medium disturbances - John Kulvicki (2008, 2014, 2016) — auditory perspectives, audible profiles - Jason Leddington (2014) — sounds as properties of events ### Supporting - Robert Hopkins (1998, 2020) — twofoldness in picture perception - Bence Nanay (2015) — dorsal/ventral account of pictures - Mohan Matthen (2010, 2018) — ephemeral vision, feeling of presence ### Your Published Work (background) - "Sounds as Properties" (Thought, 2021) - "Hearing Objects and Events" (Philosophical Studies, 2018) - "Hearing Spaces" (AJP, 2017) - "Audition and Composite Sensory Individuals" (with Bence Nanay, OUP forthcoming) ### Readwise - [[Readwise/Articles/Auditory Perspectives]] — Kulvicki - [[Readwise/Books/HEARING SPACE Refereeing]] — your referee report - [[Readwise/Articles/Review of Sounds are Broad events]] — your referee report --- ## Past Conversations **Search command:** `python3 ~/.local/bin/session-reader.py search "auditory|hearing sounds|sound sources|Martin" 20` **Search terms:** auditory, hearing, sounds, sound sources, Martin, Nudds, O'Callaghan, audible presence --- ## Related Thinking ![[Auditory Images.base]] --- ## Project Captures ![[Auditory Images Captures.base#Recent]] --- ## Recent Work - **2026-01-17**: Tasks completed (identify third objection, develop 2.1) — though drafts still show gaps - **2026-01-11**: Created Against Hearing Sounds Draft and Revival Analysis notes - **Pre-2026**: Long development history — extends your published auditory philosophy --- ## Context for Next Session This is a long-standing research project extending your established work in auditory philosophy. Two main drafts exist: 1. **Auditory Images** (`Writing/research/auditory images/whole undifferentiated text.md`) — 295 lines, ~60-70% complete. Argues recordings lack material presence (stereo speaker argument, headphone argument, inference to best explanation from visual case). 2. **Against Hearing Sounds** (`Notes/Against Hearing Sounds - Draft.md`) — 305 lines, ~75% complete. Argues we hear sources directly without sonic intermediary. Both converge on the same insight: recordings are *auditory images* — we have a twofold experience (hearing the absent event *in* the present speaker), analogous to seeing a photograph. **Section 2.1** needs a positive account of what "hearing material objects directly" actually consists in. Currently the argument is mostly negative (sounds get in the way). The Revival Analysis note (`Notes/Against Hearing Sounds - Revival Analysis.md`) maps gaps: - Section 1 intro: placeholder - Section 2.1: nearly empty - Section 2.3: trails off after shape argument - Section 3: missing third objection - Conclusion: just a paragraph **Open questions:** - What DOES direct source hearing involve? (Section 2.1) - Which third objection to develop? (music/pure tones, echoes, tinnitus?) - How to complete Section 2.3?