There’s a lot of discussion in the “Phenomenalism” thread https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/13247/phenomenalism/p1
about direct and indirect perception. So, I’m starting a new thread specifically about those ideas.

If I watch a YouTube live cam of New York City, all I see is light from my monitor, all I hear is sound from my speakers. I experience the light and sound directly, via my sense of sight and hearing. The sensations cause me to “see” the city in my mind. So, I see New York City indirectly via my senses and mind. I experience my sense and mind directly.

If I sit on my porch and see a tree, all I experience the light and sound directly, via my sense of sight and hearing. The sensations cause me to “see” the tree in my mind. If I touch the tree, tactile sensations enter my input stream but the situation hasn’t fundamentally changed. The sensations cause me to “see” the tree in my mind. So, I see the tree indirectly via my senses and mind. I experience my sense and mind directly.

The only things I can experience directly are my five physical senses, my emotions, and my thoughts. Everything else (ignoring the possibility of ESP, direct experience of supernatural beings, etc.) I experience indirectly.

We cannot be mistaken about what we experience directly, but we can draw erroneous conclusions, i.e., a mistaken idea may arise in my mind. For instance, in the case of a mirage my eyes are sensing light, as they always do, but my mind jumps to the incorrect conclusion that there is water. So, I see water indirectly but I see the light of the mirage directly. Obviously, it’s impossible to see water directly which doesn’t in fact exist.

If we always saw directly, then it seems to me optical illusions would be impossible.