I begin by examining a recent debate between John McDowell and Christopher
Peacocke over whether the content of perceptual experience is non-conceptua
l. Although I ma sympathetic to Peacocke's claim that perceptual content is
non-conceptual, I suggest a number of ways in which his arguments fail to
make that case. This failure stems from an over-emphasis on the 'fine-grain
edness' of perceptual content--a feature that is relatively unimportant to
its non-conceptual structure. I go on to describe two other features of per
ceptual experience that are more likely to be relevant to the claim that pe
rceptual content is non-conceptual. These features are 1) the dependence of
a perceived object on the perceptual context in which it is perceived and
2) the dependence of a perceived property on the object it is perceived to
be a property of.