Abstract
Direct realism is the view according to which the world is perceived directly rather than as the result of a mediation via sense data or other kinds of mental representation. A defense of direct realism is offered by indicating the difficulties of some arguments in support of indirect realism, whether on scientific or philosophical grounds. Moreover, a version of direct realism in terms of disjunctivism, which distinguishes veridical perception from illusion and hallucination, is also resisted. In contrast with disjunctivism, direct realism alone is able to account for perception by integrating it with hallucination and illusion. As Rami Ali argues, the former can be understood as a case of the latter, and the latter includes perception. The result is a defensible form of direct realism. Rather than taking this as a dogmatic view about the nature of perception, however, I offer it within a neo-Pyrrhonian stance.