Lax parents blamed for 'attention deficit' behaviour

Matthew Kirkcaldie Matthew.Kirkcaldie at newcastle.edu.au
Tue Jul 29 22:58:38 EST 2003


In article <3f266c80 at dnews.tpgi.com.au>, "John H." <john at faraway.com> 
wrote:

> Incorrect, saccades are not under conscious control. Besides, schizophrenics
> also show differences in saccades and Sch is most definitely an organic
> disorder.

Fallacious corrections. Saccades are muscular activity under the control 
of the central nervous system, and are therefore a behaviour.  If you 
don't think they're under conscious control, are you seriously 
suggesting that the process of reading, or deciding what to look at, is 
not consciously controlled?  Or do you mean that the actual muscular 
activity involved in a saccade is not something you think about 
explicitly?  That characteristic is shared with every voluntary movement 
made by the body, as even a cursory knowledge of the motor control 
system will tell you.

And as I mentioned in the other post, the concept of "organic disorder" 
is sufficiently loose as to be virtually meaningless in terms of 
explicative power.  If you raise a kitten with one eye covered, the 
connectional structure of its visual cortex is profoundly and 
irreversibly altered even at the macroscopic scale: would you then agree 
that it has an "organic brain disorder"?  I'll bet its saccades would be 
abnormal as well.

         Matthew.



More information about the Neur-sci mailing list