the senses are unreliable. witnesses to an event often present different versions of an event.
what you hear one day, you may not hear on another.
there is a myriad of experiemnets in the psycholgy journals, which discuss the unreliability of perception.
when you trust your senses, the result is probably true and probably false.
most audio discussions are philosophical disccsions.
they have no definitive conclusion.
let me give you an example.
suppose two people are auditioning a stereo system. the evaluation by each one will probably differ, one from the other.
in my hypothetical example, it is impossible to determine which assessment is true and which is false.
in fact "truth" and "false" are hard to establish in these audio discussions.
what you hear one day, you may not hear on another.
there is a myriad of experiemnets in the psycholgy journals, which discuss the unreliability of perception.
when you trust your senses, the result is probably true and probably false.
most audio discussions are philosophical disccsions.
they have no definitive conclusion.
let me give you an example.
suppose two people are auditioning a stereo system. the evaluation by each one will probably differ, one from the other.
in my hypothetical example, it is impossible to determine which assessment is true and which is false.
in fact "truth" and "false" are hard to establish in these audio discussions.