Published in Husserl Studies. Please cite published version, freely available here: http://rdcu.be/u8f5 1 Perceptual error, conjunctivism, and Husserl Søren Overgaard University of Copenhagen Abstract Claude Romano (2012) and Andrea Staiti (2015) have recently discussed Husserl’s account of perception in relation to debates in current analytic philosophy between so-called ‘conjunctivists’ and ‘disjunctivists’. Romano and Staiti offer strikingly different accounts of the nature of illusion and hallucination, and opposing readings of Husserl. Romano thinks hallucinations and illusions are fleeting, fragile phenomena, while Staiti claims they are inherently retrospective phenomena. Romano reads Husserl as being committed to a form of conjunctivism that Romano rejects in favour of a version of disjunctivism. Staiti, by contrast, claims that, from a Husserlian viewpoint, conjunctivism and disjunctivism are equally untenable. I suggest that both Romano and Staiti offer implausible accounts of illusions and hallucinations, and deliver premature verdicts on Husserl in relation to the analytic debates on perception. Key words Husserl; perception; illusion; hallucination; conjunctivism; disjunctivism 1. Introduction In the last couple of decades, various attempts have been made to relate phenomenological accounts of perception to debates within analytic philosophy. Recently, considerable attention has been devoted to the specific question of how to place phenomenological accounts vis-à-vis the analytic debates between so-called ‘disjunctivists’ (or ‘relationalists’, or ‘naïve realists’) and ‘conjunctivists’ (or ‘representationalists’ or ‘intentionalists’). 1 Very roughly, conjunctivists believe an experiential 1 The labels ‘intentionalism’, ‘conjunctivism’ and ‘representationalism’ are not exactly co-extensional. The same goes for ‘disjunctivism’ ‘relationalism’, and ‘naïve realism’. Addressing this matter in detail would require much space and lead me away from my main topic. I hope it will become clear which rough families of views I intend to contrast here.