Isn't it lucky?

Samson staring at my.screen
Thu Jan 9 16:43:00 EST 1997


In article <32d537d7.57900946 at nntp.ix.netcom.com>, rogue007 at ix.netcom.com
(temporary email address) wrote:

> In <82pvzf491t.fsf at zip.eecs.umich.edu> Michael Hucka
> <hucka at eecs.umich.edu> wrote...

> >I think there are many ways to do it without going through the 5
> >senses.  Chemical means are probably the most obvious; foods and drugs can
> >cause subtle changes in various aspects of brain and behavior, and most
> >people probably wouldn't consider such manipulations "perceptual".
> 
> This is extremely interesting.  Can you give some examples of changes
> in brain and behavior resulting from foods or drugs that aren't
> detected by the senses (I'm assuming that by 'brain and behavior' you
> mean responses by systems within the brain to stimuli, and other
> similar responses in other organs or organ systems)?  

He means that the manipulations are not carried out by delivering
information to the senses. "Aperceptual" manipulation is not necessarily
_non-perceivable_, nor does it imply that changes in perception will not
take place. It's just that once the manipulation is perceived, it's too
late to resist...

-- 
smisch at tiac.net (emoticons implied by context)

'Where in the world are lunatics allowed to bathe naked in the moonlight?' -- R.D. Laing



More information about the Neur-sci mailing list