"r norman" <rsn_ at _comcast.net> wrote in message
news:t6rbj09oa38srf7at60n2ds566tug2vodn at 4ax.com...
> On 1 Sep 2004 07:06:06 -0700, rscanlon at nycap.rr.com (ray scanlon)
>>> >No! Let's not. The subject is the brain, not operant behavior. The
> >subject is motor program generators. The DNA provides the generators;
> >we hear them when the infant babbles.
>> This is a fine example of the problem I wrote about in another posting
> on this thread. I did agree that it is quite likely that there are
> genetically programmed circuits in the human brain that you call
> "motor program generators" and that you claim "DNA provides". Fine,
> lets not quibble about these details.
>> However I also said that "There are enormous technical problems in
> trying to determine to what extent, if any, that any specific
> behavioral act in humans is controlled by or even initially produced
> by the genetically determined systems you describe". Now you make an
> enormous leap to simply declare that infant babbling is an example of
> just such a thing. You have absolutely no experimental evidence to
> indicate that this is true.
I think might give a clue: