If you mean that the visual sensation travels into the eye in the form of light and then becomes and experience in the brain or something like that - that’s what science would suggest as a theory. And even direct experience would back that up to some extent (closing eye lids does limit sight which kinda suggests that seeing happens from behind the eyes, this is what’s causing me confusion). But still it can’t be said that the sensation comes from somewhere and/or goes somewhere else. Or is formed in some place. It just happens / is created with no location.Normally we believe that sensation is coming from what is seen, the object in sight. So in this example, your hand is the object, and it's assumed sensation is coming from that hand. But is that really the case?
I’m unsure if I understand the question but if you mean a link between ‘feeling of the hand’ and ‘seeing the hand’ - then I’d say they are two “independent” sensations. I can see the hand and not feel it (assumption yes but everyone has had a wooden hand -type of sensation, of loosing the feeling of a certain body part) and vice versa.Is there any link between the sensation and the sight, meaning that the sensation is ‘coming from’ the sight (labelled as ‘hand’) or only thought and mental constructs link them?
If I was to define ‘control’ as something like I have control over the hand, then the control would be the tangible part and the ‘I’ illusory. No one there in control.Does control as you see it require a controller?
xxx
-s-

