Foundationalism and Directly evident problem

Foundationalism claims that there are noninferentially justified beliefs. "Chisholm" introduced "direct apprehension" as foundations. His principle is that "If there is a certain sensible characteristic F such that he perceives something to be F, then it is evident to S that be is perceiving to have that characteristic F, and also evident that there is F". but "sellars" claims that there are a "dilemma": (1) the mental act of direct apprehension or direct acquaintance is construed as noncognitive and nonconceptual in character, (2) if it is conceptual, it cannot justify. In this article I survey two responses: (1) Bonjour's response is that direct apprehension is conceptual and it can justify; (2) Fumerton's response is that the belief must be based on the relevant acts of aquaitance.