ABSTRACT
There are two objections to the distinction between perceptual procedures and instrument-enhanced procedures that I should respond to. The first is that it looks like I’m pushing a sharp distinction between perceptual procedures and instrument-enhanced procedures. But certain examples seem to show no such (sharp) distinction is available. The second is that I have given sense-perception a central role in evidence gathering, and stressed the necessity of using these senses when gathering evidence, despite the possibility that we could develop new senses (or modify our old ones in such a way that their scope and limits change drastically). I take these worries in turn.
