The confusion I hoped to reduce was to show how a conversation that appeared like there was true disagreement actually was nothing more than a minor linguistic point about not using words like "sensations" to describe our experiences of conscious thinking. If there never was any such confusion then nothing lost, nothing gained.

This. I think that, although there is disagreement, aaron is focusing on the use of the word "sense", perhaps to clarify what I mean, perhaps not ( as I have noticed him use this tactic often)

I used the words "perception stream" as being inclusive of thought rather than "sense stream" . Aaron answered that he doesnt "sense" the statement 1+1=2, so maybe that is where the misunderstanding came from.

Although maybe "perception stream" isnt any clearer than "sense stream", lol

Continuing on with the senses we encounter those objects which are not so close to us or more to the point that which is the outer world.

The " Sense of Smell" approaches and we come to our first glimpse or close contact with "Matter". A substance cannot be perceived through the "sense of smell" unless it is finely dispersed and spreads like a gas.

The next sense is the "Sense of Taste" to which we need fluid or saliva in order to enter into the being of the substance. The "sense of taste" is more of an effect upon ourselves via the substance "tasted". In the "sense of smell" we come more to the outside of the substance in our presentation whereas the "sense of taste" digs deeper into the substance and for the inside to be made known we must change the outside (or that to which smell presents) and dissolve the outside ,or substance, and note its effect.

The next sense or "Sense of Sight" digs yet deeper into the outer world and we see its inner nature via color through the medium of light. Of course the eyes are the gateway to the "sense of sight".

This next sense, the "Sense of Warmth" is not well known, or appreciated, in modern physiology but nonetheless presents itself to our considerations. When we feel a cold or warm object we enter more deeply into the object and obtain a perceptive picture of the inner nature of the object. The conventional, wrought by the physicists, has "warmth" as a state of being of an object and therefore cannot be considered in and of itself. They have replaced "warmth" by the thermometer.

Back to the issue, it can be seen that the "sense of warmth" is present throughout the human body, legs, feet,arms,head,etc.... Conventional physiologists state the there is only the "sense of touch" as warmth is not an entity in and of itself; the physicists roar again. We'll speak to the "sense of touch" later. In any case any perception of a substance via " sense of warmth" is a mandate within all human beings.

The next sense is the "Sense of Hearing" to which the ears are relevant. With this sense we enter further into the body's inwardness which starts to tremble. Again a reference: "It is more than merely metaphorical to say that a body's soul comes to manifestation through sound". Through warmth the differences in warmth comes to our attention but through sound its individual aspect comes through to our perception.

A side note of no small importance. As the researcher looks upon the senses it becomes apparent that the senses are related to different physiological appurtenances. The eye and the ear are relatedly different as is the sense of warmth or taste or smell. Studying the senses calls for the study of the individual sense and not the generalized study which calls for all sense to spoken to and one. You cannot bring forth a science of the senses by falling back into the physicists realm and assuming that beneath this is our little molecules and atoms which connect all the senses.

The thrust here is that in the study of any sense such as the "sense of sound" the acoustical must be considered but the being of Man must be considered part of the process not man sitting on the corner of the universe looking outwardly while he himself is a fifth wheel of nature. Somewhere Goethe noted that the greatest instrument is Man himself. this last paragraph goes beyond the ken but from the above it should hopefully be noted that the senses are individual in character but contained within the whole, the being of Man.

Yes, there are more "senses", later.

Again, speaking to 'sense" as to cognition without judgment or without involvement of reason, memory, etc... then referral to the "Sense of Tone" or Sense of Word". In appreciating "speech" there arises a tonal quality which goes beyond the word meaning itself and which precedes judgment , etc... This is observed in children who have a interwoven understanding of the spoken word which is contained within or the "tone" of the speech. A cry of pain gives us a direct experience of tone which precedes any judgment, reason or memory of the same. The "sense of tone".

The next sense is revealed even on a deeper level than the sense of tone and that is the "Sense of Concept". There is an immediate and direct perception of the concept which presents the most inward aspect of the perceived being. With the concept of another being we perceive what lives, soul like, within ourselves. Teh 'sense of concept".

The most seemingly obvious, saved for last, is what is called the "Sense of Touch". The revelation of the "sense of touch", considered from two sides displays difficulties. Pressure on another object may reveal hardness or softness but this is again a judgment as is irregularity of surface. The 'sense of warmth" gives a more telling presentation of an object as does the 'sense of hearing". In clarity the "sense of touch" is more cogently represented with the realm of the first three senses of life, movement and balance.

An inner look at the 'sense of touch" will reveal that when a person touches another object or being the experience of the sensor is of one's self. Touch an outer object and realize that the effect is an inner appreciation of the self and says nothing about the outer object that hasn't been presented within the other senses, as delineated. As an extreme the pricking of our finger by a needle tells you nothing about the needle that precedes judgment but does bring forth an experience of one's self in this aspect. this idea can be brought further but not now as it can be seen that in Man's will laden activities of the earth, in the building of bridges, painting of masterpieces, indeed, walking the earth, the human being obtains a "sense of self", which some do not believe exists, the self, that is.