[Buddha-l] there he goes again (sam harris)

[Mike Austin]

In message <200610301615.54464.rhayes at unm.edu>, Richard Hayes 
<rhayes at unm.edu> writes
>On Monday 30 October 2006 15:12, Vicente Gonzalez wrote:
>
>> The experience exists. I don't say that we can experience a dog who is
>> not present. Just that we can experience that a dog is not present.
>
>That is precisely what I deny. I agree with Dignaga and Dharmakirti on this
>when they say that our knowledge that a dog is not present is not an
>experiential knowledge but an inference that involves mental constructions of
>the sort that are not present in direct experience.

Experiencing the presence of 'a dog' also involves mental construction. 
Is this sort of mental construction present in direct experience?

-- 
Metta
Mike Austin