ABSTRACT
Anosognosia is not illusion, and illusion is not anosognosia. However, there are possible cases in which we can re-interpret the two kinds of errors in terms of each other without ontological consequence. A case of anosognosia can be a case of illusion, and vice versa, so long as both are of different properties related as follows: the non-appearance of one property is the appearance of another. If one previously understood the erroneous experience about mental entities as illusions of non-spatiality, one can put aside this interpretation. The error is anosognosia. Hallucination involves there being no objects. Anosognosia involves there appearing to be less than there is. The problem with these kind of objects is that they seem to be as likely to be there in hallucinations as in illusions. Some object with properties other than the apparent properties are likely to be there even in hallucinations. The world in which subjects and their experiences are embedded are not voids.
