A couple of things that I need to illuminate upon in my questioning
of mental imagery. I do understand the difference between morse code
and a propositional language. May be 'logical language' would have
been a better word to use. But it was this form of logic language using
computational symbol manipulation that I thought would be a better in
explaining the process of mental functioning rather than a binary
system. Which I reckon is too simplistic in dealing with the enormous amount
of input.
Secondly, my idea for C.P.U projection was that nearly all areas of
the brain are inter-linked to each other and do not operate
separately. I also understand that during visual imaging : the picture
is mapped to areas within the cortex in what (I think ?) is spacial
relation to the details of the picture. This also seems to occur in mental
imaging ; when the same areas are active as the subject is asked to
'think' of an object/something (maybe 'think' is also the wrong
word). This image mapping is retinotopic mapping.
But does P.E.T imaging only identify the retinotopic areas or is there
activation in other parts of the brain ? I.e. is the mapped area the only
one active during imaging or is say another one (i'm not just
considering higher cortical functioning) also working at this point in time.
I doubt it ? But that was the point that I was trying to convey,
As the Kosslyn article only talked about the retinotopic mapped
areas being active and nothing else.
P.S If there is no Homonculus. Does he have some sort of metaphorical
brother called the 'Unconscious Homonculus' ? 'The little
unconscious man in our head' (and I do not mean that he is
asleep) dealing with the 'Freudian' / unconscious motives for
behaviour
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue Feb 13 2001 - 16:23:39 GMT