We are perfectly justified in maintaining that only what is within ourselves can be immediately and directly perceived, and that only my own existence can be the object of a mere perception. Thus the existence of a real object outside me can never be given immediately and directly in perception, but can only be added in thought to the perception, which is a modification of the internal sense, and thus inferred as its external cause … . In the true sense of the word, therefore, I can never perceive external things, but I can only infer their existence from my own internal perception, regarding the perception as an effect of something external that must be the proximate cause … . It must not be supposed, therefore, that an idealist is someone who denies the existence of external objects of the senses; all he does is to deny that they are known by immediate and direct perception … . —Critique of Pure Reason, A367 f.
As far as understanding the phenomenon as a pure illusion it is worth noting that clouds directly above appear bigger that clouds that are viewed at the horizon, as they are several miles away. As the moon is most often seen with some clouds the comparison between small clouds to the moon against large clouds and the moon would answer the problem. On Jun 14, 9:47 am, Georges Metanomski <[email protected]> wrote: > --- On Sun, 6/13/10, chazwin <[email protected]> wrote: > > > I have heard two explanations of this phenomenon. > > 1) A moon alone in the blackness of space provides no > > referent to the > > observer and thus appears smaller than it would near the > > horizon. > > 2) The view of the moon through the horizon benefits from a > > magnifying > > affect due to the greater density of the atmosphere at this > > angle. > > =========== > G: > 2).Is a simple ignorance of facts. > 1).Points in the right direction, but makes just one step in a trip > round the world. > > Let's recall the facts: > > Not only external measurements, such as photos, but even > ophthalmoscopic examinations show that moon images projected > on the retina have identical sizes in both events. Thus, however it > happens, the illusion takes place in the brain and my percepts of moon > seem to be constructs of my mind. > In other terms the issue boils down to the fact that my mind makes > a difference between two identical circles transfered to it from > the retina. > The question is not HOW it does it - that we don't know - but what > intuitive criterion can we see as the premise of its decision. > > Cheers > Georges. > =================== -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Epistemology" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology?hl=en.
