Total Posts:27|Showing Posts:1-27
Jump to topic:

Things I'm willing to debate.

bossyburrito
Posts: 14,075
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/4/2014 3:59:41 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
Just making a dumping grounds for any resolutions that interest me, for future reference.

The Existence of God Is Logically Impossible (Pro)

The Three Basic Axioms* Cannot Be Refuted (Pro)

The Senses Are Infallible (Pro)

That Foreign Intervention by Civilized Nations Cannot Be Opposed Due to Human-Rights Concerns**

Israel Is Not to Blame for Any Palestinian Civilian Casualties Inflicted during the Conflict with Hamas

*Axiom One: That existence exists (i.e. something exists that exists) Axiom Two: That that which exists exists as something (The law of identity - A is A), and Axiom Three: That an entity exists which is aware of that which exists (That something has consciousness).

**If those who the intervention is trying to stop do not recognize human rights themselves
#UnbanTheMadman

"Some will sell their dreams for small desires
Or lose the race to rats
Get caught in ticking traps
And start to dream of somewhere
To relax their restless flight
Somewhere out of a memory of lighted streets on quiet nights..."

~ Rush
bossyburrito
Posts: 14,075
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/4/2014 4:00:00 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
Message me or make a post or something if anything interests you.
#UnbanTheMadman

"Some will sell their dreams for small desires
Or lose the race to rats
Get caught in ticking traps
And start to dream of somewhere
To relax their restless flight
Somewhere out of a memory of lighted streets on quiet nights..."

~ Rush
UchihaMadara
Posts: 1,049
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/5/2014 1:03:44 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/4/2014 3:59:41 AM, bossyburrito wrote:
Just making a dumping grounds for any resolutions that interest me, for future reference.

The Senses Are Infallible (Pro)

this one feels like there is a trick to it.... it would be too easy otherwise.
bossyburrito
Posts: 14,075
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/5/2014 1:10:26 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/5/2014 1:03:44 AM, UchihaMadara wrote:
At 9/4/2014 3:59:41 AM, bossyburrito wrote:
Just making a dumping grounds for any resolutions that interest me, for future reference.

The Senses Are Infallible (Pro)

this one feels like there is a trick to it.... it would be too easy otherwise.

What would you try to run as a counterargument, out of curiosity?
#UnbanTheMadman

"Some will sell their dreams for small desires
Or lose the race to rats
Get caught in ticking traps
And start to dream of somewhere
To relax their restless flight
Somewhere out of a memory of lighted streets on quiet nights..."

~ Rush
UchihaMadara
Posts: 1,049
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/5/2014 1:16:18 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/5/2014 1:10:26 AM, bossyburrito wrote:
At 9/5/2014 1:03:44 AM, UchihaMadara wrote:
At 9/4/2014 3:59:41 AM, bossyburrito wrote:
Just making a dumping grounds for any resolutions that interest me, for future reference.

The Senses Are Infallible (Pro)

this one feels like there is a trick to it.... it would be too easy otherwise.

What would you try to run as a counterargument, out of curiosity?

the first one that comes to mind is optical illusions and hallucinations.
bossyburrito
Posts: 14,075
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/5/2014 1:20:45 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/5/2014 1:16:18 AM, UchihaMadara wrote:
At 9/5/2014 1:10:26 AM, bossyburrito wrote:
At 9/5/2014 1:03:44 AM, UchihaMadara wrote:
At 9/4/2014 3:59:41 AM, bossyburrito wrote:
Just making a dumping grounds for any resolutions that interest me, for future reference.

The Senses Are Infallible (Pro)

this one feels like there is a trick to it.... it would be too easy otherwise.

What would you try to run as a counterargument, out of curiosity?

the first one that comes to mind is optical illusions and hallucinations.

I would argue that optical illusions are anything but illusions, and are 100% true-to-reality. If you look at, say, a straw bending in water, it looks like the straw is bent not because your senses are being tricked, but because your senses are accurate , since, in reality, the light really is bent when it travels in and out of the water. That is not an illusion. Everything you perceive does exist in the way which you perceive it.

If you were to draw from the straw in the water the idea that the straw was actually bent, that would be a problem of conceptual interpretation, rather than one of raw sense data.
#UnbanTheMadman

"Some will sell their dreams for small desires
Or lose the race to rats
Get caught in ticking traps
And start to dream of somewhere
To relax their restless flight
Somewhere out of a memory of lighted streets on quiet nights..."

~ Rush
UchihaMadara
Posts: 1,049
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/5/2014 1:30:56 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/5/2014 1:20:45 AM, bossyburrito wrote:
At 9/5/2014 1:16:18 AM, UchihaMadara wrote:
At 9/5/2014 1:10:26 AM, bossyburrito wrote:
At 9/5/2014 1:03:44 AM, UchihaMadara wrote:
At 9/4/2014 3:59:41 AM, bossyburrito wrote:
Just making a dumping grounds for any resolutions that interest me, for future reference.

The Senses Are Infallible (Pro)

this one feels like there is a trick to it.... it would be too easy otherwise.

What would you try to run as a counterargument, out of curiosity?

the first one that comes to mind is optical illusions and hallucinations.

I would argue that optical illusions are anything but illusions, and are 100% true-to-reality. If you look at, say, a straw bending in water, it looks like the straw is bent not because your senses are being tricked, but because your senses are accurate , since, in reality, the light really is bent when it travels in and out of the water. That is not an illusion. Everything you perceive does exist in the way which you perceive it.

If you were to draw from the straw in the water the idea that the straw was actually bent, that would be a problem of conceptual interpretation, rather than one of raw sense data.

hmm... i suppose so... but there are other optical illusions that actually cause you to see things the wrong way... i have a book full of them somewhere, and besides that there are also hallucinations and mirages and things of the like which have similar effects.
bossyburrito
Posts: 14,075
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/5/2014 1:48:58 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/5/2014 1:30:56 AM, UchihaMadara wrote:
At 9/5/2014 1:20:45 AM, bossyburrito wrote:
At 9/5/2014 1:16:18 AM, UchihaMadara wrote:
At 9/5/2014 1:10:26 AM, bossyburrito wrote:
At 9/5/2014 1:03:44 AM, UchihaMadara wrote:
At 9/4/2014 3:59:41 AM, bossyburrito wrote:
Just making a dumping grounds for any resolutions that interest me, for future reference.

The Senses Are Infallible (Pro)

this one feels like there is a trick to it.... it would be too easy otherwise.

What would you try to run as a counterargument, out of curiosity?

the first one that comes to mind is optical illusions and hallucinations.

I would argue that optical illusions are anything but illusions, and are 100% true-to-reality. If you look at, say, a straw bending in water, it looks like the straw is bent not because your senses are being tricked, but because your senses are accurate , since, in reality, the light really is bent when it travels in and out of the water. That is not an illusion. Everything you perceive does exist in the way which you perceive it.

If you were to draw from the straw in the water the idea that the straw was actually bent, that would be a problem of conceptual interpretation, rather than one of raw sense data.

hmm... i suppose so... but there are other optical illusions that actually cause you to see things the wrong way... i have a book full of them somewhere, and besides that there are also hallucinations and mirages and things of the like which have similar effects.

Any such phenomena can be explained in terms of the reactions between physical entities (like light) and the sense-organ. The hallucination does exist, it just doesn't exist how you might conclude that it does. A mirage isn't really an oasis in a desert, but that doesn't mean you were tricked - the light rays that hit your eyes are all real.

Things like dreams and such, which have no external elements, aren't really the result of sense perception, just introspection.
#UnbanTheMadman

"Some will sell their dreams for small desires
Or lose the race to rats
Get caught in ticking traps
And start to dream of somewhere
To relax their restless flight
Somewhere out of a memory of lighted streets on quiet nights..."

~ Rush
UchihaMadara
Posts: 1,049
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/5/2014 1:57:10 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/5/2014 1:48:58 AM, bossyburrito wrote:
At 9/5/2014 1:30:56 AM, UchihaMadara wrote:
At 9/5/2014 1:20:45 AM, bossyburrito wrote:
At 9/5/2014 1:16:18 AM, UchihaMadara wrote:
At 9/5/2014 1:10:26 AM, bossyburrito wrote:
At 9/5/2014 1:03:44 AM, UchihaMadara wrote:
At 9/4/2014 3:59:41 AM, bossyburrito wrote:
Just making a dumping grounds for any resolutions that interest me, for future reference.

The Senses Are Infallible (Pro)

this one feels like there is a trick to it.... it would be too easy otherwise.

What would you try to run as a counterargument, out of curiosity?

the first one that comes to mind is optical illusions and hallucinations.

I would argue that optical illusions are anything but illusions, and are 100% true-to-reality. If you look at, say, a straw bending in water, it looks like the straw is bent not because your senses are being tricked, but because your senses are accurate , since, in reality, the light really is bent when it travels in and out of the water. That is not an illusion. Everything you perceive does exist in the way which you perceive it.

If you were to draw from the straw in the water the idea that the straw was actually bent, that would be a problem of conceptual interpretation, rather than one of raw sense data.

hmm... i suppose so... but there are other optical illusions that actually cause you to see things the wrong way... i have a book full of them somewhere, and besides that there are also hallucinations and mirages and things of the like which have similar effects.

Any such phenomena can be explained in terms of the reactions between physical entities (like light) and the sense-organ. The hallucination does exist, it just doesn't exist how you might conclude that it does. A mirage isn't really an oasis in a desert, but that doesn't mean you were tricked - the light rays that hit your eyes are all real.

Things like dreams and such, which have no external elements, aren't really the result of sense perception, just introspection.

that's true, i suppose... well, you've certainly given me something to think about. i might end up being interested in debating it upon further contemplation.
YYW
Posts: 36,391
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/5/2014 8:40:42 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/4/2014 3:59:41 AM, bossyburrito wrote:
Just making a dumping grounds for any resolutions that interest me, for future reference.

The Existence of God Is Logically Impossible (Pro)

The Three Basic Axioms* Cannot Be Refuted (Pro)

The Senses Are Infallible (Pro)

That Foreign Intervention by Civilized Nations Cannot Be Opposed Due to Human-Rights Concerns**

Israel Is Not to Blame for Any Palestinian Civilian Casualties Inflicted during the Conflict with Hamas

PM me. I want to know your thoughts on that situation, but I don't want you to give away your arguments ;)

*Axiom One: That existence exists (i.e. something exists that exists) Axiom Two: That that which exists exists as something (The law of identity - A is A), and Axiom Three: That an entity exists which is aware of that which exists (That something has consciousness).

**If those who the intervention is trying to stop do not recognize human rights themselves
Tsar of DDO
Wocambs
Posts: 1,505
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/5/2014 9:09:41 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/4/2014 3:59:41 AM, bossyburrito wrote:
Just making a dumping grounds for any resolutions that interest me, for future reference.

The Existence of God Is Logically Impossible (Pro)

The Three Basic Axioms* Cannot Be Refuted (Pro)

The Senses Are Infallible (Pro)

That Foreign Intervention by Civilized Nations Cannot Be Opposed Due to Human-Rights Concerns**


Would debate.

Israel Is Not to Blame for Any Palestinian Civilian Casualties Inflicted during the Conflict with Hamas


Would debate.

*Axiom One: That existence exists (i.e. something exists that exists) Axiom Two: That that which exists exists as something (The law of identity - A is A), and Axiom Three: That an entity exists which is aware of that which exists (That something has consciousness).

**If those who the intervention is trying to stop do not recognize human rights themselves
bossyburrito
Posts: 14,075
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/5/2014 9:26:56 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/5/2014 9:09:41 PM, Wocambs wrote:
At 9/4/2014 3:59:41 AM, bossyburrito wrote:
Just making a dumping grounds for any resolutions that interest me, for future reference.

The Existence of God Is Logically Impossible (Pro)

The Three Basic Axioms* Cannot Be Refuted (Pro)

The Senses Are Infallible (Pro)

That Foreign Intervention by Civilized Nations Cannot Be Opposed Due to Human-Rights Concerns**


Would debate.

Israel Is Not to Blame for Any Palestinian Civilian Casualties Inflicted during the Conflict with Hamas


Would debate.

*Axiom One: That existence exists (i.e. something exists that exists) Axiom Two: That that which exists exists as something (The law of identity - A is A), and Axiom Three: That an entity exists which is aware of that which exists (That something has consciousness).

**If those who the intervention is trying to stop do not recognize human rights themselves

Which one would you rather do? I'm leaning towards the Israeli-Palestine debate, but it's your call.
#UnbanTheMadman

"Some will sell their dreams for small desires
Or lose the race to rats
Get caught in ticking traps
And start to dream of somewhere
To relax their restless flight
Somewhere out of a memory of lighted streets on quiet nights..."

~ Rush
Wocambs
Posts: 1,505
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/8/2014 9:50:03 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/5/2014 9:26:56 PM, bossyburrito wrote:
At 9/5/2014 9:09:41 PM, Wocambs wrote:
At 9/4/2014 3:59:41 AM, bossyburrito wrote:
Just making a dumping grounds for any resolutions that interest me, for future reference.

The Existence of God Is Logically Impossible (Pro)

The Three Basic Axioms* Cannot Be Refuted (Pro)

The Senses Are Infallible (Pro)

That Foreign Intervention by Civilized Nations Cannot Be Opposed Due to Human-Rights Concerns**


Would debate.

Israel Is Not to Blame for Any Palestinian Civilian Casualties Inflicted during the Conflict with Hamas


Would debate.

*Axiom One: That existence exists (i.e. something exists that exists) Axiom Two: That that which exists exists as something (The law of identity - A is A), and Axiom Three: That an entity exists which is aware of that which exists (That something has consciousness).

**If those who the intervention is trying to stop do not recognize human rights themselves

Which one would you rather do? I'm leaning towards the Israeli-Palestine debate, but it's your call.

Heh, all right. If you could send me the text of the challenge before you challenge me that would be great... I am not going to be tricked into 'defending' Hamas or anything like that. I simply believe Israel has deployed unjust violence against the Palestinian people.
lannan13
Posts: 23,106
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/8/2014 4:41:43 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/5/2014 9:26:56 PM, bossyburrito wrote:
I could debate you, but none of the topics you mentioned interest me.
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-Lannan13'S SIGNATURE-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-

If the sky's the limit then why do we have footprints on the Moon? I'm shooting my aspirations for the stars.

"If you are going through hell, keep going." "Sir Winston Churchill

"No one can make you feel inferior without your consent." "Eleanor Roosevelt

Topics I want to debate. (http://tinyurl.com...)
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~
bossyburrito
Posts: 14,075
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/9/2014 1:11:56 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/8/2014 9:50:03 AM, Wocambs wrote:
At 9/5/2014 9:26:56 PM, bossyburrito wrote:
At 9/5/2014 9:09:41 PM, Wocambs wrote:
At 9/4/2014 3:59:41 AM, bossyburrito wrote:
Just making a dumping grounds for any resolutions that interest me, for future reference.

The Existence of God Is Logically Impossible (Pro)

The Three Basic Axioms* Cannot Be Refuted (Pro)

The Senses Are Infallible (Pro)

That Foreign Intervention by Civilized Nations Cannot Be Opposed Due to Human-Rights Concerns**


Would debate.

Israel Is Not to Blame for Any Palestinian Civilian Casualties Inflicted during the Conflict with Hamas


Would debate.

*Axiom One: That existence exists (i.e. something exists that exists) Axiom Two: That that which exists exists as something (The law of identity - A is A), and Axiom Three: That an entity exists which is aware of that which exists (That something has consciousness).

**If those who the intervention is trying to stop do not recognize human rights themselves

Which one would you rather do? I'm leaning towards the Israeli-Palestine debate, but it's your call.

Heh, all right. If you could send me the text of the challenge before you challenge me that would be great... I am not going to be tricked into 'defending' Hamas or anything like that. I simply believe Israel has deployed unjust violence against the Palestinian people.

I could even send you my whole R1 argument in a few days, if you want to be sure before you accept it.
#UnbanTheMadman

"Some will sell their dreams for small desires
Or lose the race to rats
Get caught in ticking traps
And start to dream of somewhere
To relax their restless flight
Somewhere out of a memory of lighted streets on quiet nights..."

~ Rush
Wocambs
Posts: 1,505
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/9/2014 5:45:16 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/9/2014 1:11:56 PM, bossyburrito wrote:
At 9/8/2014 9:50:03 AM, Wocambs wrote:
At 9/5/2014 9:26:56 PM, bossyburrito wrote:
At 9/5/2014 9:09:41 PM, Wocambs wrote:
At 9/4/2014 3:59:41 AM, bossyburrito wrote:
Just making a dumping grounds for any resolutions that interest me, for future reference.

The Existence of God Is Logically Impossible (Pro)

The Three Basic Axioms* Cannot Be Refuted (Pro)

The Senses Are Infallible (Pro)

That Foreign Intervention by Civilized Nations Cannot Be Opposed Due to Human-Rights Concerns**


Would debate.

Israel Is Not to Blame for Any Palestinian Civilian Casualties Inflicted during the Conflict with Hamas


Would debate.

*Axiom One: That existence exists (i.e. something exists that exists) Axiom Two: That that which exists exists as something (The law of identity - A is A), and Axiom Three: That an entity exists which is aware of that which exists (That something has consciousness).

**If those who the intervention is trying to stop do not recognize human rights themselves

Which one would you rather do? I'm leaning towards the Israeli-Palestine debate, but it's your call.

Heh, all right. If you could send me the text of the challenge before you challenge me that would be great... I am not going to be tricked into 'defending' Hamas or anything like that. I simply believe Israel has deployed unjust violence against the Palestinian people.

I could even send you my whole R1 argument in a few days, if you want to be sure before you accept it.

That would be very nice of you.
Sargon
Posts: 524
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/9/2014 6:23:15 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
I will be glad to debate "The Three Basic Axioms* Cannot Be Refuted" as Con if I'm allowed to use a continental style of writing (think creative non-fiction).
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,254
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/9/2014 10:03:07 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
"*Axiom One: That existence exists (i.e. something exists that exists) Axiom Two: That that which exists exists as something (The law of identity - A is A), and Axiom Three: That an entity exists which is aware of that which exists (That something has consciousness)."

Is this the extent of Ayn Rand's stance on metaphysics? I never got around to reading her book on Epistemology.
bossyburrito
Posts: 14,075
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2014 9:54:38 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/9/2014 1:40:47 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
"The Senses Are Infallible (Pro)"

What do you mean by infallible?

That that which is perceived from sense perception is necessarily in-line with reality.
#UnbanTheMadman

"Some will sell their dreams for small desires
Or lose the race to rats
Get caught in ticking traps
And start to dream of somewhere
To relax their restless flight
Somewhere out of a memory of lighted streets on quiet nights..."

~ Rush
bossyburrito
Posts: 14,075
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2014 9:57:55 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/9/2014 10:03:07 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
"*Axiom One: That existence exists (i.e. something exists that exists) Axiom Two: That that which exists exists as something (The law of identity - A is A), and Axiom Three: That an entity exists which is aware of that which exists (That something has consciousness)."

Is this the extent of Ayn Rand's stance on metaphysics? I never got around to reading her book on Epistemology.

Her metaphysics is very barebones - she wrote only about that which she was certain was necessarily true (I.e. the axioms above) and the implications of those axioms. She left everything else to the special sciences.

Have you read OPAR?
#UnbanTheMadman

"Some will sell their dreams for small desires
Or lose the race to rats
Get caught in ticking traps
And start to dream of somewhere
To relax their restless flight
Somewhere out of a memory of lighted streets on quiet nights..."

~ Rush
bossyburrito
Posts: 14,075
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2014 10:00:31 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/9/2014 6:23:15 PM, Sargon wrote:
I will be glad to debate "The Three Basic Axioms* Cannot Be Refuted" as Con if I'm allowed to use a continental style of writing (think creative non-fiction).

Sure! You might have to wait a whole, though, since I don't want to overload myself with debates. One or two at a time is all I can really handle right now.
#UnbanTheMadman

"Some will sell their dreams for small desires
Or lose the race to rats
Get caught in ticking traps
And start to dream of somewhere
To relax their restless flight
Somewhere out of a memory of lighted streets on quiet nights..."

~ Rush
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,254
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2014 10:59:26 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/11/2014 9:54:38 AM, bossyburrito wrote:
At 9/9/2014 1:40:47 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
"The Senses Are Infallible (Pro)"

What do you mean by infallible?

That that which is perceived from sense perception is necessarily in-line with reality.

By "in-line with reality", do you mean perceptions necessarily map to objective phenomena, or do you mean "that which you perceive is necessarily that which you perceive". I will accept if you mean the former.
bossyburrito
Posts: 14,075
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2014 11:05:10 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/11/2014 10:59:26 AM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 9/11/2014 9:54:38 AM, bossyburrito wrote:
At 9/9/2014 1:40:47 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
"The Senses Are Infallible (Pro)"

What do you mean by infallible?

That that which is perceived from sense perception is necessarily in-line with reality.

By "in-line with reality", do you mean perceptions necessarily map to objective phenomena, or do you mean "that which you perceive is necessarily that which you perceive". I will accept if you mean the former.

I think that perceptions are perceptions, not of mental phenomena alone, but of physical entities outside the mind interacting with physical sense organs in such a way that sense perception gives objective knowledge of reality. Perceptions are necessarily of things outside of consciousness. There's a distinction to be made between sense perception and conceptualization, though, and I would not argue that humans cannot hold false concepts.
#UnbanTheMadman

"Some will sell their dreams for small desires
Or lose the race to rats
Get caught in ticking traps
And start to dream of somewhere
To relax their restless flight
Somewhere out of a memory of lighted streets on quiet nights..."

~ Rush
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,254
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2014 11:10:16 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/11/2014 11:05:10 AM, bossyburrito wrote:
At 9/11/2014 10:59:26 AM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 9/11/2014 9:54:38 AM, bossyburrito wrote:
At 9/9/2014 1:40:47 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
"The Senses Are Infallible (Pro)"

What do you mean by infallible?

That that which is perceived from sense perception is necessarily in-line with reality.

By "in-line with reality", do you mean perceptions necessarily map to objective phenomena, or do you mean "that which you perceive is necessarily that which you perceive". I will accept if you mean the former.

I think that perceptions are perceptions, not of mental phenomena alone, but of physical entities outside the mind interacting with physical sense organs in such a way that sense perception gives objective knowledge of reality. Perceptions are necessarily of things outside of consciousness. There's a distinction to be made between sense perception and conceptualization, though, and I would not argue that humans cannot hold false concepts.

I'll debate you on this. Make sure to include this in the first round.