From: Noam Chomsky Sent: Sunday, August 2, 2015 1:41 PM To: Jeffrey E. Subject: RE: Re: The idea of interpreting sensory systems as involving both input and output, and hence presumably accessing a central system of competence (as distinct from the input-output performance systems) is a very interesting one, particularly the hints about eyes. I don't see quite how it works, but worth pursuing and thinking about. Very few people I can think of, but will think more. What sensory systems provide to the brain is always interpreted by internal systems, memory included, and the sensory systems themselves carry out analysis. There's a good deal of detailed work on this, mainly for sound and vision. Turns out, for example, that chimp auditory system yields something very close to the physical features that enter into the phonological systems of human language, but lacking the internal interpretation, for the apes it's noise while for the newborn infant it's language. From: jeffrey E. [mailto:[email protected] Sent: Saturday, August 01, 2015 7:33 PM To: Noam Chomsky Subject: Re: Re: is a first step to get a group together of people that might add useful insights. . people you respect . though you might disagree. maybe we pose the question to the group. re eyes, it seems that each sense should have both a transmitter and receiver, . scent. smell., hearing voice. , touch movement, sight -? , I think the eyes transmit info. my work on placebo showed video did not work, no explanation, interrogators. use eyes to gauge truthfulness. ( But these are all cognitive interpretations of the (internal) output of the visual system. , -- not sure what input is not- a cognitive interpretation.? why I like the music work is that our brain must first deconstruct the chords. Fourier transform , or something like, it. then have a memory to know whether the next two or three notes follow grammatically from the past few. On Sat, Aug 1, 2015 at 6:30 PM, Noam Chom