How can you prove the reliability of sensory perception?

Question

In my last question, I asked atheists how they prove their own existence. Several said something along the lines of 'You can see me, end of story.' or 'Because I'm right here, duh'

My question is this. How can an atheist prove that their senses aren't misleading them? Please, no more logical fallacies.

This should be quite educational, thanks in advance.

Answer 1

That is a good question, and it really has no answer. Philosophically speaking, nothing can be proven. The existence of a tree cannot be proven because it might be a creation of one's imagination. You, and I, and the computer you're reading right now may be all in a dream. However, there has to be a mind, or a thought process, for even these illusions (if that's what they are) to exist. Hence, Descartes' "I think, therefore I am" (which itself is questioned in philosophy).

Without disclosing my own philosphy on religion, I am curious: Why do you address that question specifically to athiests? Can a theist, or even a Christian (which I presume you are) prove their own existence any better than an athiest? Do they have access to some concrete proof of existence that has escaped every philosopher throughout history? I don't think so.

And you're welcome!

Answer 2

According to Buddhist teaching... you can touch something, so it exists... HOWEVER (brace y'self) you are "empty of inherent existence", in other words you don't exist without causes and conditions... there's really NO identifiable, concrete, unchanging "I" or "me" when you hunt for one. So you perceive that you exist inherently, but that is incorrect perception... it's VALID perception but incorrect (it's valid to you, but wrong idea overall). This is where the whole spiel about "form is emptiness and emptiness is form" from the Heart Sutra.

It doesn't mean you don't exist at all... nothing so idiotically nihilistic as some people think we're getting at, it means RATHER that you don't exist without causes and conditions, you're impermanent and constantly changing, therefore there's no solid "I" to find when you look in the mirror.

So to them it's valid perception, but it's "incorrect perception" logically speaking, which is where a lot of people go down the logic road all wrong and why so many people are so soaked in so much suffering. You're nothing without everything that made you who you are, who brought you into this world and other people and things that help keep you alive... you're an integral part so the world doesn't revolve around YOU, you're part of the "world".

If you enjoyed and understood this little bit of Buddhist logic, then you'll get a HOOT out of digging into it deeper via various Buddhist books on logic, perception, reality, science vs. Buddhism, etc.

_()_

Answer 3

Wait, why do you want atheists to prove they exist? Don't religious people believe they exist, too?

As for sensory perception... not reliable. I think, therefore I am, but that doesn't mean that what I sense is real. I may be a brain in a vat with electrodes attached to me, telling me that I'm using my hands to type on my computer while sitting in my chair. There's no way for me to prove (to myself or anyone "else") that my sensory perceptions are not misleading.

Answer 4

The shared experiences of perception, the ability of language to describe experiences such that they can be recognized by others who have only read them before, and the ability to make predictions that certain sensory perceptions will occur given certain events or manipulations. These suffice for the basic accuracy of perceptions, but not the infallibility of perceptions.

Answer 5

Look you cant just say that our sensory perception is distorted in some way without providing any evidence. Jumping to conclusions has never got us anywhere.

Answer 6

The fact that everything we know to be "real" has been learned through information gathered through our senses is good enough for me. If my senses are not real, then I can't honestly say ANYTHING is real.

Good question though.

Answer 7

You can't. Again, this boils down to the ultimate problem of epistemology.

You can prove ultimately nothing. Existence must be acecpted axiomically or not at all.

Answer 8

We are all pretty much in agreement that sensory perception is reliable. All 6.5 billion of us.

Answer 9

You have circular logic. How can you prove that your sense aren't misleading you? And please, for the love of (your) God, please don't say anything about God and your sensory perceptions.

Answer 10

Intersubjective agreement, just like any other form of science.