Reply to comment

Along with many other people in our class, I question our definitions of “input” and “output,” or at least how the definitions are being utilized in our discussions.  I do not think that inputs need to be tangible, nor temporally concurrent. Rather, actions (outputs) may result from past experiences based on perceived similarities between the past and present situations. By restricting ourselves to the most concrete of inputs I think we might limit our understanding of the brain and how we generate novel ideas or grasp abstract concepts. Furthermore, we would also be neglecting the role of interneurons; it seems highly unlikely that their sole function is to send information to other neurons. Surely there must be some more complex role of interpretation or mediation that goes on within our brains.