The first five of these types of natural occurrence are easily accessible to sense perception (aided perhaps by instruments of observation), the sixth, however, is not available to
ordinary sense perception.
Because of God's transcendence it would be mythological to refer to God's action in terms appropriate only to objects available, in principle at least, to
ordinary sense perception.13 This especially means that one can not speak of God in terms of the categories of time and space; 14 i.e., whatever is predicated of God can not apply only to some particular time and space, but must apply equally to all times and spaces.15 Thus the implication of Ogden's criterion for non-mythological language about God corresponds to his statement of several years ago, that «there is not the slightest evidence that God has acted in Christ in any way different from the way in which he primordially acts in every other event.
Not exact matches
Thus perhaps we should conclude that Whitehead uses «
perception» in an extended
sense, like many other terms he appropriates from
ordinary language, such that one need not be conscious to have
perceptions in the mode of CE.
Whitehead believed that
ordinary sense experience is in fact an integration of
perception in the mode of presentational immediacy and
perception in the mode of causal efficacy.
Some of the greatest physicists have described it as impossible to intuit and impossible to formulate into words, and as invalidating common
sense and
ordinary perception.
While Dodd's ambitions do not run in this direction, she can be seen as a contemporary embodiment of the way an American devotion to direct experience can create a
sense that extends beyond «mere» representation, and suggests that there is something immanent in a deep
perception of the
ordinary.