Re: Difference between cognition and perception?

["f.maintenant" <f.maintenant@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Brian Gygi's very clear explanation is pretty similar to the one found in a
interesting text by the musicologist Marc Leman: Naturalistic approaches to
musical semiotics and the study of causal musical signification,  Published
in: I. Zannos (Ed.) (1999). Music and Signs - Semiotic and Cognitive Studies
in Music, Bratislava: ASCO Art and Science, pp.11-38

Evoking the human information processing system, Marc Leman (5.1, p.15)
proposes to distinguish between:

. sensory information processing: eyes, ears, and other sense organs are
assumed to be the same for the members of all cultures.

. perceptual information processing: it is assumed that the dynamics which
underlays processes such as grouping including both segmentation (in time)
and segregation (of voices), and fusion are the same for the members of all
cultures.

. cognitive information processing: it is assumed that the dynamic
principles of apperception, learning, categorization, association, including
physical constraints of human bodily movement etc. are the same for the
members of all cultures.

The complete text can be found at:
http://www.ipem.ugent.be/staff/marc/papers/NaturalisticSemiotics.pdf.


Frédéric Maintenant



----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian Gygi" <bgygi@EBIRE.ORG>
To: <AUDITORY@lists.mcgill.ca>
Sent: Tuesday, April 13, 2004 9:35 PM
Subject: Re: Difference between cognition and perception?


> At 09:45 PM 4/13/2004 +0200, pallier wrote:
> >Woojay Jeon wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > I am wondering if anyone can clarify the exact difference between
> > > "cognition" and "perception", at least in terms of acoustics, and also
> > > provide some examples illustrating the difference?
>
> Defining cognition in terms of acoustics is tricky, because most IP models
> of cognition deliberately abstract away from the sensory-specific
> properties of the stimulus.  So you might say that "perception" includes
> acoustics and "cognition" does not, or in "cognition" acoustics and optics
> are treated in the same way.
>
> And I agree with Christophe Pallier that they are ultimately not very
> useful concepts, despite what I told my students in Introduction to
Cognition.