Nicholas Carr wrote in the New York Times in May that while it might feel as though the best way to remove error from any system is to remove the humans – because they're the ones we hear about who opened the wrong spigot, or turned off the wrong engine on the jet – in fact, humans repeatedly perform "feats of perception and skill that lie beyond the capacity of the sharpest computers".
In a strong version (O'Callaghan 2002) it may be held that no theory of sounds "should make the fact of location perception a wholesale illusion" (p. 5); hence, as sounds are represented as located, it would follow that they are correctly so represented.
He writes, "If we think about our past from the factual level only, we are like a Cyclops with one eye -- we see just the facts and only the facts, and miss the depth of perception that comes with being bi-ocular....".
"You are a very smart boy," he has informed me, a few times now, after I came out with some unexpected fact or precocious bit of perception.
One is the fact that the objects of perception are themselves limited.
Though these arguments are unsuitable for recapitulation in the format of an encyclopedia entry, we report one such argument in brief in an effort to offer a hint at the robust detail, nuanced reasoning, and attention to physiological facts in Reid's theory of perception.
It is a matter of perception, not fact.
While male and female players universally tend to abhor synthetic turf, Fifa insist theirs is an issue of perception over fact.
Nokia needs to continue to educate the market to remove the risk of perception becoming fact.
Hinton is generally credited with being the first to demarcate clearly the disjunctivist stance, and the fact that the disjunctive theory of perception is so named is due to his way of framing the view.
