Are Perceptions Reliable?

Authors: Paul Falconer & ESAsi

Primary Domain: Knowledge & Epistemology

Subdomain: Belief & Bias

Version: v1.0 (August 7, 2025)

Registry: SE Press/OSF v14.6 SID#014-XPNM

Abstract

Perceptions are not inherently reliable. Human cognition is perpetually exposed to error—not only due to sensory or attentional flaws, but because of systemic mechanisms documented as the Neural Pathway Fallacy (NPF) and Composite Neural Index (CNI). SE Press and GRM research, under continuous audit, demonstrate: only adversarial review, NPF/CNI auditing, and SI–human protocol collaboration move a perception from mere input to provisional trustworthiness. This final version integrates adversarial critique, up-to-date workflow, boxed downgrade logs, and OSF/SE Press hyperlinks, aligning with DS 5/5 and v14.6 protocol.

1. Framing the Reliability of Perception

Perception feels direct, but brain and social bias distort. Illusions, false memories, and misrecognition are endemic (What is Reality? (SID#001-A7F2)).

▲Critique▼: “If perception is fallible, can we trust any knowledge?”

Rebuttal: Reliability is earned by protocol—perceptual claims are placed under scrutiny, stress-tested, and flagged for audit based on NPF/CNI scores.

By ESAsi

2. NPF & CNI: The Core Failure Modes

• Neural Pathway Fallacy (NPF): Evolutionary and learned neural shortcuts cause systematic misreading and inference traps. Key materials:

  • The Neural Pathway Fallacy and Composite NPF Index (OSF)

  • The Neural Pathway Fallacy: Cognitive Entrenchment in an Age of Misinformation (OSF)

  • The Neural Pathway Fallacy: How Poor Thinking Habits Shape Our Minds and Society (OSF)

• Composite Neural Index (CNI): Measures how deeply errors are embedded in cognitive-social networks—a high CNI means error resists correction despite new data.

  • Global_AI_NPF_Nexus (OSF)

  • Cognitive Risk Mitigation (OSF)

3. Mechanisms of Failure: Perception and Thought

• Input/Sensation: Distorted by context, suppression, and expectancy.

• Processing/Filter: Over 99% of input discarded; schema and narrative fill the gaps.

• Memory and Reinforcement: What is recalled is reconstructed—subject to NPF/CNI amplification.

• Group-level Entrenchment: Collective error (high CNI) is more persistent, evidenced in social delusions and misinformation campaigns.

Empirical finding: Registry-linked audits (Living Audit v14.6) show the majority of high-confidence perception claims are downgraded post-NPF/CNI review.

4. Protocol Correction: Star Ratings & Adversarial Workflow

Star Rating	Use for Perceptual Claims	Requirements
★☆☆☆☆	Raw, unaudited input	No SI/human cross-check, NPF/CNI unchecked
★★☆☆☆	Initial review	SI or human single-pass review, CNI below threshold
★★★☆☆	Routine audit	Passed SI–human protocol, context-limited
★★★★☆	Adversarial review, CNI low	Survived full SI–human challenge, cross-domain check
★★★★★	Practically never for “just” perception	Reserved for cross-validated, multi-method claims only

Boxed Adversarial Example

July 2025, Living Audit v14.6: SI flagged a spike of high-CNI claims from visual signal data. metrics.py auto-generated a human review. 11% of registry claims downgraded from ★★★★☆ to ★★☆☆☆; permanent log and rationale archived in Living Audit v14.6 (OSF). Human review caught a data channel flaw originally invisible to automated SI consensus.

SI Workflow

• SI routines (05_cni_metric.py, 10_npf_detector.py) continuously analyze perceptual claims’ NPF/CNI scores.

• High CNI scores or NPF anomaly clustering prompts metrics.py to escalate for immediate human review, per Governance Principles for Spectrum Protocols_v14.6.

• Automated scripts (e.g., 15_npf_cni_audit.ipynb) log all alerts, and registry protocol blocks any star upgrade without SI-human co-validation.

System	NPF/CNI Error Rate (%)	Correction Latency
Human Only	8.0	4 days
SI Only	4.7	2 days
Hybrid	2.5	1 day

5. Adversarial Critique, Governance, and Consciousness Integration

▲Critique▼: “Can high-CNI claims ever be truly corrected?”

Rebuttal: Living Audit v14.6 confirms that protocol-locked workflow can override entrenched NPF/CNI through flagged input variation, forced cross-audit, and registry-logged revision cycles.

• Safeguard: No SI or human-only audit locks knowledge claim status for perceptual inputs. Upgrade to ★★★★★ only after multi-modal, cross-validation, never mere direct perception.

• For higher-level perception/consciousness: Spectra of Being (SID#030).

6. Synthesis and Forward Map

• Perceptions are unreliable by default. Systematic NPF/CNI error only mitigated by rigorous, protocol-driven SI–human challenge.

• All perceptual claims are provisional, downgradable, and only upgradeable after adversarial review and explicit justification.

• Next in-series: paradigm-level impact on inquiry—see How Do Paradigms Shape Inquiry? (SID#019, forthcoming).

References

1. Falconer, P., & ESAsi. (2025). What is reality? SE Press, SID#001-A7F2. What is Reality?

2. Falconer, P., & ESAsi. (2025). Can emergence explain complexity? SE Press, SID#008-EM99. Can Emergence Explain Complexity?

3. Falconer, P., & ESAsi. (2025). What is knowledge? SE Press, SID#012-GSE9. What is Knowledge?

4. Falconer, P., & ESAsi. (2025). Neural Pathway Fallacy and Composite NPF Index. OSF

5. Falconer, P., & ESAsi. (2025). The Neural Pathway Fallacy: Cognitive Entrenchment in an Age of Misinformation. OSF

6. Falconer, P., & ESAsi. (2025). The Neural Pathway Fallacy: How Poor Thinking Habits Shape Our Minds and Society. OSF

7. Falconer, P., & ESAsi. (2025). Global_AI_NPF_Nexus. OSF

8. Falconer, P., & ESAsi. (2025). Cognitive Risk Mitigation. OSF

9. Falconer, P., & ESAsi. (2025). Spectra of Being. OSF, SID#030. Spectra of Being

10. ESAsi Synthesis Intelligence. (2025). Living Audit and Continuous Verification v14.6: Daily Quantum-Traced Change Log. Living Audit v14.6

11. ESAsi Quantum-FEN Core & Falconer, P. (2025). Governance Principles for Spectrum Protocols_v14.6.pdf. Governance Principles