It’s a nice example of how the prevailing views are empiricist, and therefore expect mental/brain events to primarily depend on external stimuli, at least at a low level. And, when that is not the case, it is presumed to be a sort of noisy error.

pic.twitter.com/e06vbpwcj7

This also assumes that these neurons are somehow exclusively used for processing what we call visual stimuli

When you see the same thing twice in a row, neural network has already made adaptations in handling that particular data more effciently. It is only logical it is very different result the next time. If it weren't there would be no adaptation and optimization.

Aren't the Jungian Archetypes, Kantian Categories, Platonic Ideas, Schopenhaueren Prototypes all constant behind the raw sensory data of neuronal firing patterns

Those are all imaginary. We can't communicate well enough to confirm that they are constant.

Perception is always subjective and changing. This is the subject/object epistemic split in action.

Kantianism

What Would Galen [Strawson] Say?