What claim is made about extra-sensory perception's validity in relation to confirmation?

The claim made about extra-sensory perception's (ESP) validity in relation to confirmation is best represented by the concept of inconceivability. This idea suggests that the reliance on extraordinary claims, such as those associated with ESP, necessitates extraordinary evidence. Since ESP is often deemed inconceivable by the scientific community, it lacks credible validation through empirical evidence or reproducible results. Consequently, the argument is put forth that if a claim cannot be conceived within the bounds of established scientific understanding or natural laws, it is unlikely to gain acceptance unless substantial proof can be provided.

In this context, inconceivability helps underscore the skepticism surrounding ESP claims, highlighting the necessity for strong evidence rather than acceptance based solely on anecdotes or unverified experiences. This contrasts with the other concepts, which focus on other logical fallacies or biases that do not directly address the critical need for evidence as it pertains to the validation of claims like ESP.