It is only after much hesitation that the writer has reconciled himself to the addition
of the term "neurodynamics" to the list of such recent linguistic artifacts as "cybernetics,
"bionics", "autonomics", "biomimesis", "synnoetics", "intelectronics", and "robotics".
It is hoped that by selecting a term which more clearly delimits our realm of interest
and indicates its relationship to traditional academic disciplines,
the underlying motivation of the perceptron program may be more successfully communicated.
The term "perceptron", originally intended as a generic name for a variety of theoretical nerve nets,
has an unfortunate tendency to suggest a specific piece of hardware,
and it is only with difficulty that its well-meaning popularizers
can be persuaded to suppress their natural urge to capitalize the initial "P".
On being asked, "How is Perceptron performing today?" I am often tempted to respond,
"Very well, thank you, and how are Neuron and Electron behaving?"
For this writer, the perceptron program is not primarily concerned with the invention of devices for "artificial intelligence", but rather with investigating the physical structures and neurodynamic principles which underlie "natural intelligence". A perceptron is first and foremost a brain model, not an invention for pattern recognition. As a brain model, its utility is in enabling us to determine the physical conditions for the emergence of various psychological properties.