All contact is indirect to some degree. Visual contact with an apple is mediated by light, for instance. When you feel it you're not feeling "the apple", you're feeling the pressure it creates on your skin. Hearing about an apple second hand is simply adding one more layer of separation.
December 21, 2025 at 8:04 PM
All contact is indirect to some degree. Visual contact with an apple is mediated by light, for instance. When you feel it you're not feeling "the apple", you're feeling the pressure it creates on your skin. Hearing about an apple second hand is simply adding one more layer of separation.
How are you defining "contact' here?
December 21, 2025 at 7:56 PM
How are you defining "contact' here?
You are insisting that "holding and seeing an apple" and "perceiving an apple" are completely equivalent statements. They are not, the former is more specific.
December 21, 2025 at 7:55 PM
You are insisting that "holding and seeing an apple" and "perceiving an apple" are completely equivalent statements. They are not, the former is more specific.
As is "inferring the existence of an apple"
December 21, 2025 at 7:53 PM
As is "inferring the existence of an apple"
It is completely impossible to "experience the actual thing". By perceiving something you inherently change it.
December 21, 2025 at 7:52 PM
It is completely impossible to "experience the actual thing". By perceiving something you inherently change it.
To be clear, they are both similar in that that they are both forms of perception.
December 21, 2025 at 7:49 PM
To be clear, they are both similar in that that they are both forms of perception.
What I said was that inference was similar to "holding and looking at an apple". You didn't use the word "perception".
December 21, 2025 at 7:47 PM
What I said was that inference was similar to "holding and looking at an apple". You didn't use the word "perception".
A more specific definition would be that perception is interpretation and analysis of the signals that our sensory organs create. After all if an eye was reacting to light, but wasn't connected to a brain, it wouldn't really be "seeing" anything.
December 21, 2025 at 7:46 PM
A more specific definition would be that perception is interpretation and analysis of the signals that our sensory organs create. After all if an eye was reacting to light, but wasn't connected to a brain, it wouldn't really be "seeing" anything.
I mean pretty much, yeah.
December 21, 2025 at 7:43 PM
I mean pretty much, yeah.
Is too
December 21, 2025 at 7:42 PM
Is too
Glad we agree
December 21, 2025 at 7:42 PM
Glad we agree
It is similar, as in both cases you are gaining information about an apple.
December 21, 2025 at 7:39 PM
It is similar, as in both cases you are gaining information about an apple.
You are using information gained through your senses in order to infer the existence of this object.
December 21, 2025 at 7:39 PM
You are using information gained through your senses in order to infer the existence of this object.
Is too.
December 21, 2025 at 7:37 PM
Is too.
All kinds of perception are prone to error.
December 21, 2025 at 7:37 PM
All kinds of perception are prone to error.
And all of this evidence is gained through perception. I feel like you guys aren't appreciating the elegance of the catch-22 I've put you in.
December 21, 2025 at 7:36 PM
And all of this evidence is gained through perception. I feel like you guys aren't appreciating the elegance of the catch-22 I've put you in.
Making inferences is a form of perception , in that it allows you to gain information.
December 21, 2025 at 7:33 PM
Making inferences is a form of perception , in that it allows you to gain information.
Meaningless distinction. Both of those are based on perception.
December 21, 2025 at 7:30 PM
Meaningless distinction. Both of those are based on perception.
You are making an argument. This argument is based on evidence. Evidence is based on perception.
December 21, 2025 at 7:17 PM
You are making an argument. This argument is based on evidence. Evidence is based on perception.
All right I think I see what the argument you're actually trying to make is and I see my counterpoint. Your error is insane that we can "go back to before we perceived the mustard". We can't; by gaining new knowledge we have changed the past.
December 21, 2025 at 7:14 PM
All right I think I see what the argument you're actually trying to make is and I see my counterpoint. Your error is insane that we can "go back to before we perceived the mustard". We can't; by gaining new knowledge we have changed the past.
I'm not sure what you're talking about. I do not believe that Penn and Teller are real magic.
December 21, 2025 at 7:05 PM
I'm not sure what you're talking about. I do not believe that Penn and Teller are real magic.
Nothing gets past you, huh?
December 21, 2025 at 6:57 PM
Nothing gets past you, huh?