Xanada observes that the implications of the word actually are too subtle, and that this subtlety weakens the argument. Xanada also craves elaboration on the phrase some external source, which seems too vague for a solid argument. The strength of the argument is not dependent upon this particular phrase. However, Xanada s first two complaints are valid. If human beings derive knowledge from sources other than sensory stimuli, then human beings are not merely disembodied brains being fed artificial sensory stimuli from some external source.
Human beings derive knowledge from sources other than sensory stimuli, such as intuition .
Human beings are not merely disembodied brains being fed artificial sensory stimuli from some external source. Boristiki says that there is no connexion drawn between knowledge, which is mentioned in the major and minor premises, and the essential nature of humanity. He notices that there is a suppressed premise which states that knowledge dictates what human beings essentially are. Boristiki is, in fact, correct. If human beings derive knowledge from sources other than sensory stimuli, and human beings are defined by their collective knowledge , then human beings are not merely disembodied brains being fed artificial sensory stimuli from some external source.