I'm not sure I follow your argument, but to clarify things.
Perception is often defined as the conscious appreciation of sensation. Essentially, any input into the brain that hits consciousness (as opposed to your brain sensing that the CO2 in your blood is lower than normal).
There are quite a few definitions. The important ones:
- Practical contact with and observation of facts or events.
- An event or occurrence we encounter or undergo.
- An event or occurrence which leaves an impression on someone
The third definition is somewhat problematic, as you can argue that people can experience something without it leaving a long lasting impression. The counter argument is the claim that the impression is left, only it is being overridden or simply lost within the neural network for being too weak.
There is no agreement on what this means, but there are leading definitions:
- Anything that happens to users whilst using a system. This is the umbrella term definition.
- The emotional component of what happens to users while using the system.
Personally, I'm much in favour of the first option, and simply call the second Affectivity. It makes things much much easier when you try to build a coherent understanding of the topic. But some core textbooks favour the second definition.
You use the mouse cursor as an input into the brain via the visual channel. It is true that you sense the mouse itself while touching it, but by all other means you are using it as an output device from the brain, through your motor system.
Thus, the mouse cursor is clearly perceived by sight - it is on the screen; the screen emits light, which goes through the eyes, retina, photoreceptors, and the optic nerves. That's how we perceive and experience it.
Even without touching anything, you will perceive the mouse cursor thorough your eyes.