| Sumario: | In this article I raise empirical challenges for the claim that area MT/V5 is the neural correlate for visual experience as of motion (Block, 2005). In particular, Ifocus on the claim that there is matching content between area MT, on one hand, and visual experience as of motion, on the other hand (Chalmers, 2000; Block, 2007). I survey two lines of empirical evidence which challenge the claim of matching content in area MT. The first line of evidence covers new results in neuroscience which emphasize the ongoing dynamics in cortical activity. The second line of evidence focuses on results regarding area MT in particular (Maier, Logothetis and Leopold, 2007; Cohen and Newsome, 2008). Together, the empirical results indicate that neural processing is context sensitive in a way that challenges the attribution of content to local areas of the cortex, to area MT in particular. In the final part of the article I explore alternative approaches and discuss remaining issues.
|
|---|