1: Sensory Perceptions - Assignment Example

On Sensory Perceptions: Validity and Proclivity Certain debates have emerged about the role of sensory perception in terms of knowledge production and understanding the workings of things in the world we live in. The use of senses is innate in every individual, whether it is on the level of observation, feeling and experiencing. However, the issue that I want to tackle in this paper is this: are sensory perceptions considered credible sources of information and knowledge? In the paper of Mylopoulos, he asserts that motor theory of control consciousness is considered a more credible source of information due to the claim that motor commands make a direct control of awareness in controlling one’s actions (2011).

In this case, he contests the claim of Prinz about sensory perception having an innate capacity in anticipating an action and consequences based on how the senses work (Mylopoulos 2011). For both views, there is a certain degree of primacy on which one is considered to be more accurate and valuable. Having both premises, even of both are equally valid, there is a need to know that sensory perception can be good and can be bad. It can be good since the experience gathered from the use of senses is an invaluable data because it is a direct, hands – on engagement with a certain phenomenon.

This is highlighted on how the study of cancer patients on their use of sensory perception (Goossens, et. al, 2011). The researchers have tried to take into account the experience of cancer patients in order to determine how they can respond to the needs of the patients. However, there is a certain degree of problem about the use of sensory perception as basis of data because of subjectivity. Experiences are varied. These are not the same for every individual even if they are undergoing the same procedure or having the same condition / disposition.

Self – regulation theory is being highlighted in the case study since there is an engagement and disengagement on the part of those undergoing the experience of surgical procedure (Goossens, et. al, 2011). There is an interaction with the procedure based on how it goes, as mediated or experiences by the senses and there is control, as manifested by the way the respondents have conditioned their thinking, prior to undergoing the experience (Gossens, et. al, 2011). Nonetheless, there is a need to look on how sensory perception and the thinking that comes with it under a multitude of possibilities.

This possibility poses subjectivity, which is grounded on the prior knowledge of an individual, especially on how he or she predisposes one’s self as a response to a certain occurrence that he or she experiences (Kirby and Goodpaster 2007). Thus, sensory perception aids in thought processing, based on what we read, what we feel and on how it influences how we think. Thus, the varied encounters project such a condition. A natural encounter and a conditioned encounter, based on how we see nature, have different paradigms of engagement.

This is highlighted earlier on how cancer patients respond directly to an encounter (via the use of senses) and conditioned one’s disposition (knowledge of the experience). Thus, sensory perceptions cannot be wrong. However, the only problem emerges if the experiences are generalized from the senses are confined under one idea despite its subjectivity. In the end, sensory thinking is a way to experience and see the world based on how one sees it and on how one makes sense of it. One may have a prior knowledge of a certain event but it does not necessarily mean that it will be hold true and the same for everyone.

Nonetheless, one’s experience is responsive to the wide – array of knowledge about it. It is equally valid, though can be contested, but still plays a role on how an individual respond to the way things happen in the world. BibliographyEva Goossens, M. R. (2011). Sensory Perceptions of Patients With Cancer Undergoing Surgical Insertion of a Totally Implantable Venous Access Device: A Qualitative, Exploratory Study . Oncology Nursing Forum , 38 (1), 20 - 26.Mylopoulos, M. I. (2011). Why Reject a Sensory Imagery Theory of Control Consciousness? . Topics in Cognitive Science 3 , 268 - 272.

Goodpaster, G. R. (2007). THINKING An Interdisciplinary Approach to Critical An Interdisciplinary Approach to Critical and Creative Thought and Creative Thought. Upper Sadle, New Jersey, USA: Pearson Education, Inc.