Re: Creativity

On Sun, 30 Nov 2003 20:32:11 GMT, "OmegaZero2003"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> in comp.ai.philosophy wrote:

>
>"Lester Zick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>organ.
>>
>> From my perspective I consider them perceptual organs. The term
>> sensory organ seems ambiguous to me. Skin is also a sensory organ. I
>> think the difference really depends on what we mean by perception
>> versus sense. I'm not sure there is an absolute distinction to be made
>> but the term perception seems more appropriate.
>
>Perhaps looking at it this way might help:
>
>There are recepts: those processes that impinge upon a sense organ (the
>reflected light form a flower's surface process impinges upon the retina).
>
>There are percepts; those processes in brain that result from a transform of
>a recept; in this case there are VCx brain processes that deal with the
>signal from the eyes.
>
>There are concepts; those processes in brain that result from a transform of
>a percept (from the VC for example) into some type of categorical
>information/knowledge (that is a flower I am looking at)
>
>There are introcepts; those processes in brain that examine its own
>(consciouss) processes.
>
>
>>
>> The brain itself is definitely not a perceptual organ.
>
>There are parts that are perceptual in the scenario I outlined above.
>
Well, Omega, the  problem I have with this treatment is that even if
there are such things in the brain, their import is not so obvious in
exact cogntive terms. If it were the problem of cogntion would already
be solved in mechanical terms.


Regards - Lester