Abstract
The question asked in this paper concerns the relation between perception, the senses, and the human faculty of conceptualizing experiential values. I suggest that I came across data that exemplifies the transition from the sensing of an Umwelt to a conceptual grasp. The human faculty of conceptualizing experiential values obviously relies on experiential ontologies as a reference system. But the latter does not bring about the conceptualizing. The main question is then: How does conceptualizing work, and what is a concept? Do we know what conceptualizing is like? Do we know what thinking is? Of course, we experience the processual endpoints with words as convenient results. We seem to know how we learn words. Do we also know how we create their meanings? The meanings of iteration and infinity are in focus here. The passage from iteration to infinity is not defined by words. The distribution of response numbers seems to indicate that there is an underlying feeling, or sensing that enables, and accompanies, the understanding of a meaning.