Tyler Burge's *Origins of Objectivity* is definitely 21st-century philosophy. Famous for his views on "anti-individualism" (that an individual, for example, cannot have 'arthritis in the thigh', even if they are mistaken about the use of the term "arthritis", because causal conditions for the term's applicability are lacking), Burge here turns to the study of perception and finds fault with nearly every tendency of 20th-century thought. Burge's "Individual Representationalists" -- they are legion -- think that perceptual thought involves high-level cognitive capacities that situate percepts in a matrix of general, conceptual thought. Burge thinks they are wrong, and that perception is a natural kind possessed by young children and animals unable to use quantification and other pieces of the apparatus of full-blown language use; he cites very many psychological studies in defense of his views, and develops some arguments to the effect that the psychological kind "representation" relies only on a dynamic interaction with the environment and some very few cognitive abilities.
Burge's new naturalism puts him at odds with a gamut of philosophers, from John McDowell to Jerry Fodor, and he is not shy about claiming (sometimes only claiming) that their views are profoundly mistaken. Unfortunately, the New Frontier Burge wishes to explore is a bit too much for him at many points. Since he has lost access to the Sellarsian and Wittgensteinian distinction between ground and cause, the "problems of rationality" that exercised people like Donald Davidson seem quite pointless to him; when, where full-stop justification of empirical beliefs is on the agenda, these problems are not optional. Burge's historical sketches, particularly of Kant and Continental philosophers he wishes to include in the number of Individual Representationalism, are unconvincing, and his lack of continuity with earlier naturalists like Ruth Garrett Millikan is disturbing. Still, most books on the philosophy of psychology that you read in the future are likely to be at least somewhat in Burge's line.
Worth taking a look at.