It is crucial to unlearn the habit of thinking that things seem to have the color which common sense says the really have, and to learn the habit of seeing things as they appear. .
.
It is clear from what we have found, that there is no color which preeminently appears to be the one color of the basketball, or even one particular part of the basketball since it appears to be different from all points of view, and there is no reason for regarding some of these as more really its color than others. It is thus concluded that the color, shape, and size I am aware of at any one occasion is not something which is inherent in the basketball, but something depending upon the basketball, the spectators nervous system and the way the light falls on the ball. There this leads to the belief that the real basketball-if there is one at all- is not the same as what I immediately experience. The real basketball is not immediately known to me at all, but must be an inference from what is immediately known. Two questions follow in which it is asked if there is a real ball at all and if so, what sort of object can it be.
In considering these two questions two terms must first be defined. The first is the term of "sense data" or impression is given to the things that are immediately known in sensation: such as colors, sounds, taste and so forth. The second term that follows is the term sensation which is the name given to the experience of being immediately aware of these sense data. Color for example is a sense datum, not a sensation. If I am to know anything about the basketball it is through sense data which I associate with the table, but, I cannot say that the basketball is the sense data or that the sense data are direct properties of the basketball. Thus another problem arises as to the relationship between the sense data to the real basketball, supposing that there is such a thing. The real basketball will be called a physical object, which in other words is reffered to as a matter/ a material object.
