Thorns

Color is perhaps a bad example for you to use, because the type of disbelief you're talking about is a kind of faith - disbelief in the face of substantive evidence to the contrary. You belief in color *because* there is substantive evidence that you have encountered that suggests that colour exists. I believe color exists, because I did experiments in high school and split light and played with colour wheels, and later learned a bit about how the human eye and brain work, and a bit more about physics. Belief in the existence of something when there is experimental data to back it up, data that can be replicated and tested by others is not faith in colour. Faith in fellow humans to carry out the scientific process correctly, perhaps, but not in colour itself. And if in ten years, a new theory comes along to explain colour that blows the old one out of the water, I'd pretty damn surprised, but probably also really interested as to why my previous understanding was false, and treat it as a learning experience.

You're on stronger ground with the perceptual framework argument, particularly given that recent studies have found that we may well be predisposed to believe in the, for want of a better term, supernatural. However, that framework is not actually the default point. The default point is what existed before the framework was fully developed - before the point of full indoctrination, if you will. Through the construction of the framework, you move away from the default, whatever exactly that is (no belief, desire to believe, seeing patterns in chaos etc), to a new position of belief.