Search Forum:

I'm working on a master's thesis on direct and indirect views of sense data. In the literature 'sense data' are often asserted to exist effecting the senses but are not directly knowable. I'm confused by Piaget's wording. In the following passages does Piaget assert the existence of 'something' that effects the senses but is also unknowable? " . . . manifests an ontological or ontic point of view which goes beyond phenomenalism and postulates the idea that there is 'something' beyond the observable whose presence must be taken into account" (178). "What the notion of a real or physical dependence now adds is the idea that this 'something' situated beyond the observable by the combinators is not only present, but is also active and a source of connections: this brings us even closer to the actions 'attributed' to objects, thus to the exigency of casuality" (179). "The passage from laws, which with their coordinators and their 'dependences' already imply a universe of active 'objects' beyond the observable phenomena, to the causal 'production' of these observable phenomena, is dual in nature, or is at least pursued along two parallel paths like two armies which join forces to converge on a single objective" (179-180). These passages are from - Epistemology and Psychology of Functions By Jean Piaget, Jean-Blaise (CON) Grize, A. Thanks, Any responses are appreciated.