05-28-2016, 04:19 PM
(05-27-2016, 01:26 AM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: They don't need to touch the shapes to use proprioception to identify the shapes.
...
That was my thought process and why I voted yes.
I understand the thought process an can see the logic. Yes it is logic but the current studies demonstrate it is incorrect.
In the 18th century, somewhere around 50 years after the question was originally proposed, what may have been the first example of of surgically repaired eyes giving sight to the blind. Even though it wasn't incorporated into actual experimental studies until 2003 the observations of people for the next 200+ years all indicated that in practice the theory of innate vision comprehension just didn't hold up. It is a totally new type of data that a brain needs to learn to interpret. You just don't take a computer audio file and expect an image program such as Photoshop or Gimp to comprehend a "new" type of data without teaching (programming) it to understand that new data.
I didn't vote because I viewed it as unfair for me to give input since the question was clearly intended as philosophical instead of with actual knowledge derived from reported experiments. Ten years ago, before I knew of either experiments or the 200+ years of observation, I would have been the only person to vote no apparently. Maybe my unusual experience with the question, "What language to deaf people think in?", may well be why I understood the unknown data concept.
