[edit] plato.stanford.edu/entries/sense-data/
Sorry, though it is easier to read it here, I might get in trouble for posting that very large quote, so just click on the link to read the very same thing.[/edit]
Dunamis,
You are welcome.
Arendt,
Thanks, that’s a nice source and good summation.
Dunamis
Unless we draw clear distinctions among body, mind, and soul, it is difficult to come up with any clear definition of “sense data”.
I define “sense data” as any data that enters the body via interactions with fundamental particles near the surface of the body. This is about as clear an idea of sense data as you can get.
“Sense data” is conveyed via additional particle interactions in sense organs, nervous system, etc., into the brain, at which point it is “sense data after processing outside the brain”.
From the brain, “sense data after processing outside the brain” is by further particle interactions conveyed to souls located within the brain.
“Soul” means here simply any fundamental particle, conceived as a conscious entity that “knows” the indications (impressions, ideas, thoughts, etc.) that enter it, and acts somehow on the reality (other souls and messages being passed among them) beyond Appearance (the sum of all entering indications).
To clarify a bit on “messages”. A message entering a soul is what I have called an “indication” (impression, idea, thoughts, etc.). A message leaving a soul is what I will call now a “volition” (act of will).
(Incidentally, this simple definition of soul immediately solves the mind-body problem and eliminates the so-called “mystery” of consciousness (also so-called the “hard problem” of consciousness).)
If the period of time that elapses before the data is delivered to the soul is short enough that no indications of “thinking”, “recall”, etc. enter the soul, then the data is called “sense data after processing by brain and body but before indications of ‘thinking’, ‘recall’, etc., enter the soul”. Here, unfortunately, we get into the kind of unavoidably fuzzy definition to be expected of such a complex idea.
The mind, of course, is simply the brain from the point of view of a soul within the brain.
Sometimes when I use ‘sense datum’, I completely disregard mind dependence and any doubt regarding the existence of the object being sensed. I assume you and I see the same trees and blue sky. I can still say something philosophical (but perhaps not epistemological). I am still being a philosopher, but not a “Professional Philosopher” who is so bound by his profession that he cannot breathe.