But its very definiteness makes it the more evidently obnoxious to criticism.

The intermediate form allows that the nature we are discussing is always the nature directly known, and so far it rejects the bifurcation theory.

But it holds that there are psychic additions to nature as thus known, and that these additions are in no proper sense part of nature.

For example, we perceive the red billiard ball at its proper time, in its proper place, with its proper motion, with its proper hardness, and with its proper inertia.

But its redness and its warmth, and the sound of the click as a cannon is made off it are psychic additions, namely, secondary qualities which are only the mind's way of perceiving nature.
This is not only the vaguely prevalent theory, but is, I believe, the historical form of the bifurcation theory in so far as it is derived from philosophy.