RE: Non-sensory experiences

From: Webb, Steve (
Date: Thu Nov 08 2001 - 11:17:17 MST

From: J. R. Molloy []
> Although the brain registers it, that wonderful feeling (note that it
is a
> *feeling* rather than a concept) has its origin somewhere outside the
> (which is incapable of any feeling -- that's why it's not necessary to
> anesthetize the brain itself during surgery), and for this reason, I
> conjecture that the feeling originates in the ENS.

I think there may be some confusion here regarding my use of the word
"feeling" to describe the emotional state of "eureka!". I assert that
this emotional state is *not* a feeling the sense you're using it. As
far as I can tell, this *emotional state* resides entirely within the
brain (although there may be secondary effects transmitted outside of
the brain, e.g. ENS transmissions that cause goose pimples or make one
feel flushed as a result of the "eureka!" experience.

Earlier you offered a definition of "sensory" that supposedly cleared
everything up:

> Main Entry: senĚsoĚry
> Pronunciation: 'sen(t)s-rE, 'sen(t)-s&-rE
> Function: adjective
> Date: 1749
> 1 : of or relating to sensation or to the senses
> 2 : conveying nerve impulses from the sense organs to the nerve
centers :

But the "eureka!" experience itself has nothing to do with the senses or
sense organs as far as I can tell. It's not a sensory experience
because no senses are involved in the primary experience. There may, as
I've said, be secondary sensory experiences, but the direction of
transmission seems to be from the brain to the sense organs, not the
other way around.

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat May 11 2002 - 17:44:18 MDT