Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Justification that appearances are not misleading is equi... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Perception
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→A perceiver must know, or have reason to believe, that their perceptual sources are reliable before those sources can be trusted as evidence.

    Justification that appearances are not misleading is equivalent to having reason to believe perceptual sources are reliable.

    PerceptionTruth & Knowledge
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

    No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Topics

    PerceptionTruth & Knowledge

    Connections

    1 topic

    Skepticism2 linked

    Related

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Perception
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    A perceiver must know, or have reason to believe, that their perceptual sources ...Any justification an appearance lends to a belief in the corresponding reality m...

    Similar

    A perceiver must know, or have reason to believe, that their perceptua...85%Any justification an appearance lends to a belief in the corresponding...81%Having justification for taking perceptual experiences to be reliable ...79%We must distinguish between perceiving that p (which entails p is true...78%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: formal-epistemology
    View source passageHide passage
    This second horn is sharpened by White (2006), who formalizes it in probabilistic terms. Let \(A(D)\) be the proposition that there appears to be a door before you, and \(D\) the proposition that there really is a door there. The conjunction \(A(D) \wedge \neg D\) represents the possibility that appearances are misleading in this case. It says there appears to be a door but isn’t really. Using the probability axioms, we can prove that \(p(D\mid A(D)) \leq p(\neg (A(D) \wedge \neg D))\) (see tec

    Details

    Type
    premise
    Perspectives
    0 (0 for, 0 against)
    Edits
    1 edit

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective