This question is related to this one (and its comments) I made before: In the Dependent Origination formula, shouldn't perception precede craving instead of feeling?
According to the Khajjaniya Sutta, sañña is perception "because it perceives yellow... blue... red... white". So, it seems that it allows the mind to give a concept or label to whatever it's contacting and feeling. (https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn22/sn22.079.than.html)
To label and to recognize "such as such", one has to process enough contextual information to know that any object is that object and not other object. In the gestalt psychological theory of processing of stimuli, one identifies phenomena not because the perception of a single trait but rather the perception of a set of characteristics in a context. In between those perceived features, one may find even subjective labels, such as "good", "bad", "better", "worst", "beautiful", "ugly", etc. The nature of such concepts is that their criterion for definition is not at face value, but defined by every individual person. Those labels are ambiguous until specified by the speaker. But despite their subjective nature, they're may be included in a person's definitions of an object and its features. As an example, one might think that in the definition of an X race is the concept of inferiority in Y activity of life, such as intelectual learning.
Understood under this perspective, subjective qualities may fall under the definition of perception (at least as understood in modern psychology).
Is this also valid for Buddhism? Or do they have their own specific category? What is the perspective on this point in the myriad of traditions and sects? What do the suttas say? What is your personal opinion?
Thank you in beforehand for your time and patience!