|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Jun 2, 2017 0:29:39 GMT
It doesn't have to exclude sense data. The idea is that normally you can be aware of something other than sense data. It's similar to the realism/idealism distinction in ontology. Realists aren't saying that you can never have or be aware of ideas, that you can't imagine things that don't exist, etc. What they're saying is that not everything is just an idea, an imagining, etc. so how come sometimes we are aware of sense data and sometimes not? How do you account for secondary ualities? It's not that there's always sense data and sometimes you're aware of it and sometimes not. It's that certain situations will produce illusions, say. Whether the illusion should be called "sense data" or not is another issue, but we can just bypass that. It's fine if we say that it's "sense data." |
|
