Abstract

Upshot: We begin our response by restating and clarifying the principal argument of the target article. We go on to focus on four main themes addressed by the commentators: the question of the inevitability of a horizon in enacting beliefs about experience; the consequences of our epistemological position for second-person research methodologies; the importance of distinguishing between the feeling of veracity of what is observed and the unquestioned realistic intuitions of the natural attitude; and finally the implications of our discussion for first-person science. We conclude by addressing the question about the relationship between inferred and apprehended experience.