On the other hand, we know the brain does have specific modules (such as the visual cortex among many others), which makes an interesting dichotomy.
Actually, all that I’ve read about the visual cortex leads me to conclude that is just as generic as any other patch of cortex. It becomes visually specific only as a result of being fed visually specific information. In a congenitally blind person, the same patch of cortex will learn entirely other pattern processing functions.
That’s what we argued in our brain-to-brain communication paper:
3.2.1. A general cortical algorithm. An adult human brain consists of several areas which
are to varying degrees specialized to process different types of information. The functional
specialization is correlated with the anatomical differences of different cortical areas. Although
there are obvious differences between areas, most cortical areas share many functional and
anatomical traits. There has been considerable debate on whether cortical microcircuits are
diverse or canonical [Buxhoeveden & Casanova, 2002; Nelson, 2002] but we argue that these
differences should be considered as variations of the same underlying cortical algorithm rather
than different algorithms. This is because most cortical areas seem to have the capability of
processing any type of information. The differences seem to be a matter of optimization to a
specific type of information, rather than a different underlying principle.
The cortical areas do lose much of their plasticity during maturation. For instance, it is possible
to lose one’s ability to see colors if a specific visual cortical area responsible for color vision is
damaged. However, this reflects learning and specialization during the lifespan of the brain
rather than innate algorithmic differences between different cortical areas. Plenty of evidence
supports the idea that the different cortical areas can process any spatio-temporal patterns.
For instance, the cortical area which normally receives auditory information and develops into
the auditory cortex will develop visual representations if the axons carrying auditory information
are surgically replaced by axons carrying visual information from the eyes [Newton & Sur,
2004]. The experiments were carried out with young kittens, but a somewhat similar sensory
substitution is seen even in adult humans: relaying visual information through a tactile display
mounted on the tongue will result in visual perception [Vuillerme & Cuisiner, 2008]. What first
feels like tickling in the tongue will start feeling like seeing. In other words, the experience of
seeing is not in the visual cortex but in the structure of the incoming information.
Another example of the mammalian brain’s ability to process any type of information is the
development of trichromatic vision in mice that, like mammalian ancestors, normally have a
dichromatic vision [Jacobs et al., 2007]. All it takes for a mouse to develop primate-like color
vision is the addition of a gene encoding the photopigment which evolved in primates. The
cortex is able to adapt to this new source information from the retina and can make sense of
it. Finally, even the adult cortical areas can be surprisingly adaptive as long as the changes
happen slowly enough [Feuillet et al., 2007].
Actually, all that I’ve read about the visual cortex leads me to conclude that is just as generic as any other patch of cortex. It becomes visually specific only as a result of being fed visually specific information. In a congenitally blind person, the same patch of cortex will learn entirely other pattern processing functions.
That’s what we argued in our brain-to-brain communication paper:
That matches my understanding. It’s the parts of brain that are not the cortex that tend to have the specific functions.