My faith in the laws of economics has been reaffirmed.

[Trausti]

Drives don't point to specific behaviors. The behaviors arise through exposure to culture and experience.

If that were true, then adopted children would share the same outcomes as their non-genetic siblings. But that's not what happens. Humans are animals, after all. If you're going to attribute human behavior to culture and experience, that same attribution must be applied to all other life on the planet.

 

[untermensche]

Drives don't point to specific behaviors. The behaviors arise through exposure to culture and experience.

If that were true, then adopted children would share the same outcomes as their non-genetic siblings. But that's not what happens. Humans are animals, after all. If you're going to attribute human behavior to culture and experience, that same attribution must be applied to all other life on the planet.

Outcomes are not behaviors. And many times they share very similar outcomes.

Outcomes however are the result of capacities.

Capacities that arise in very early development. In the womb.

They arise due to exposure, not genetics.

All genetics does is give the organism capacities to react to experience.

The experience is what determines the final outcomes.

 

[coloradoatheist]

If that were true, then adopted children would share the same outcomes as their non-genetic siblings. But that's not what happens. Humans are animals, after all. If you're going to attribute human behavior to culture and experience, that same attribution must be applied to all other life on the planet.

Outcomes are not behaviors. And many times they share very similar outcomes.

Outcomes however are the result of capacities.

Capacities that arise in very early development. In the womb.

They arise due to exposure, not genetics.

All genetics does is give the organism capacities to react to experience.

The experience is what determines the final outcomes.

So it's actually fetal development that determines how well someone will understand algebra for example? But it couldn't possibly be the underlying genes that would make sense. Crazy.

 

[Trausti]

Outcomes are not behaviors. And many times they share very similar outcomes.

Outcomes however are the result of capacities.

Capacities that arise in very early development. In the womb.

They arise due to exposure, not genetics.

All genetics does is give the organism capacities to react to experience.

The experience is what determines the final outcomes.

So it's actually fetal development that determines how well someone will understand algebra for example? But it couldn't possibly be the underlying genes that would make sense. Crazy.

Unter is our resident Lysenkoist.

 

[coloradoatheist]

So it's actually fetal development that determines how well someone will understand algebra for example? But it couldn't possibly be the underlying genes that would make sense. Crazy.

Unter is our resident Lysenkoist.

Thanks, learned a new word today. I guess my capacity to learn new words was shaped by that 55,510,147 and 148th neurons spinning wildly in the womb instead of something my parents gave me.

 

[ronburgundy]

Every single culture, that is why every single culture punishes those that steal and has rules about it. Codified rules against stealing are universal, because stealing is universal, and so is the notion of property which is ultimately rooted in the simple desire to retain possession of things one desires. Chimps so a clear sense of ownership of desired objects and quickly punish those that take what is theirs. Property and theft are not merely part of human nature, but primate nature, at minimum.

What varies by culture is not whether notions of property, theft, and rules against it exist, but rather who is defined as "the other" that is or is not allowed to take it, what they are allowed to take, and how much of it they can take before it is treated as a punishable theft.

Rules against stealing property first require rules defining property.

I agree in societies where property is defined in certain ways theft of property will occur.

Define property as only that which is needed for survival and the amount of theft declines.

Sure, exactly what the concept of property applies and thus the concept of theft applies varies by culture.

But that does not support your claim that "The notion of "property" is an invention."

All cultures and even non-human primates have concepts of property and unfairness in taking the property of others. What varies is to what and to how much that concept applies. Although, theft is not limited to sole ownership property. Virtually every culture also has notions of communal property where notions of fairness and theft still apply. There is a sense of "fair share" in communal property, and it is possible to steal communal property by taking (or destroying in the case of environmental damage) more than one's fair share.

 

[coloradoatheist]

Rules against stealing property first require rules defining property.

I agree in societies where property is defined in certain ways theft of property will occur.

Define property as only that which is needed for survival and the amount of theft declines.

Sure, exactly what the concept of property applies and thus the concept of theft applies varies by culture.

But that does not support your claim that "The notion of "property" is an invention."

All cultures and even non-human primates have concepts of property and unfairness in taking the property of others. What varies is to what and to how much that concept applies. Although, theft is not limited to sole ownership property. Virtually every culture also has notions of communal property where notions of fairness and theft still apply. There is a sense of "fair share" in communal property, and it is possible to steal communal property by taking (or destroying in the case of environmental damage) more than one's fair share.

We can look at how complicated the decision to steal is, it combines several different mechanism involved. Some of those mechanism need to be explained. For example guilt.

 

[coloradoatheist]

Are the basic emotions that seemed to be shared: happiness, sadness, grief, guilt, etc just merely taught? Are you actually taught what happiness is?

 

[untermensche]

Outcomes are not behaviors. And many times they share very similar outcomes.

Outcomes however are the result of capacities.

Capacities that arise in very early development. In the womb.

They arise due to exposure, not genetics.

All genetics does is give the organism capacities to react to experience.

The experience is what determines the final outcomes.

So it's actually fetal development that determines how well someone will understand algebra for example? But it couldn't possibly be the underlying genes that would make sense. Crazy.

Are you claiming it has nothing to do with it?

While in womb, babies begin learning language from their mothers

Babies only hours old are able to differentiate between sounds from their native language and a foreign language, scientists have discovered. The study indicates that babies begin absorbing language while still in the womb, earlier than previously thought.

http://www.washington.edu/news/2013/01/02/while-in-womb-babies-begin-learning-language-from-their-mothers/

Cognitive development begins in the womb.

And it responds to external stimulation, not genetic instruction.

All of development takes place within an environment. Nowhere is there just pure genetic expression. There is always genetic expression within an environment.

 

[coloradoatheist]

So it's actually fetal development that determines how well someone will understand algebra for example? But it couldn't possibly be the underlying genes that would make sense. Crazy.

Are you claiming it has nothing to do with it?

While in womb, babies begin learning language from their mothers

Babies only hours old are able to differentiate between sounds from their native language and a foreign language, scientists have discovered. The study indicates that babies begin absorbing language while still in the womb, earlier than previously thought.

http://www.washington.edu/news/2013/01/02/while-in-womb-babies-begin-learning-language-from-their-mothers/

Cognitive development begins in the womb.

And it responds to external stimulation, not genetic instruction.

All of development takes place within an environment. Nowhere is there just pure genetic expression. There is always genetic expression within an environment.

It has some influence on it, but most of the impact is negative not positive. Lack of nutrients, drug addiction etc, not positive. And that article isn't showing what you want. All it shows is that the development of hearing starts in the womb which is known. It was the big craze with the programs to try and play Mozard and Baby Genius while in utero.

 

[untermensche]

Are you claiming it has nothing to do with it?

While in womb, babies begin learning language from their mothers

Babies only hours old are able to differentiate between sounds from their native language and a foreign language, scientists have discovered. The study indicates that babies begin absorbing language while still in the womb, earlier than previously thought.

http://www.washington.edu/news/2013/01/02/while-in-womb-babies-begin-learning-language-from-their-mothers/

Cognitive development begins in the womb.

And it responds to external stimulation, not genetic instruction.

All of development takes place within an environment. Nowhere is there just pure genetic expression. There is always genetic expression within an environment.

It has some influence on it, but most of the impact is negative not positive. Lack of nutrients, drug addiction etc, not positive. And that article isn't showing what you want. All it shows is that the development of hearing starts in the womb which is known. It was the big craze with the programs to try and play Mozard and Baby Genius while in utero.

Bad things can happen based on experience, meaning environment, that have nothing to do with genetics.

Expression of cognitive abilities are dependent on experiences that occur at critical stages of development.

It is the same for the expression of things like vision.

Cover a kitten's eyes at critical stages and the cat will never see. The genes are useless.

 

[coloradoatheist]

Are you claiming it has nothing to do with it?

While in womb, babies begin learning language from their mothers

Babies only hours old are able to differentiate between sounds from their native language and a foreign language, scientists have discovered. The study indicates that babies begin absorbing language while still in the womb, earlier than previously thought.

http://www.washington.edu/news/2013/01/02/while-in-womb-babies-begin-learning-language-from-their-mothers/

Cognitive development begins in the womb.

And it responds to external stimulation, not genetic instruction.

All of development takes place within an environment. Nowhere is there just pure genetic expression. There is always genetic expression within an environment.

It has some influence on it, but most of the impact is negative not positive. Lack of nutrients, drug addiction etc, not positive. And that article isn't showing what you want. All it shows is that the development of hearing starts in the womb which is known. It was the big craze with the programs to try and play Mozard and Baby Genius while in utero.

Bad things can happen based on experience, meaning environment, that have nothing to do with genetics.

Expression of cognitive abilities are dependent on experiences that occur at critical stages of development.

It is the same for the expression of things like vision.

Cover a kitten's eyes at critical stages and the cat will never see. The genes are useless.

And other things can happen during those stages that physically affect the development. Prove us all wrong and go and get a PhD in Biological with the thesis that genetics has no affect on behavior.

 

[coloradoatheist]

And thinking. If a gene is being expressed and doing what it needs to do at a specific time, but doesn't get the feedback that it needs, how can that not be genetic either? Is humans reaching puberty at the age they do genetic, or social conditioning. Do boys and girls go through puberty because they are told to?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

So it's actually fetal development that determines how well someone will understand algebra for example? But it couldn't possibly be the underlying genes that would make sense. Crazy.

Unter is our resident Lysenkoist.

No, because he doesn't say the changes will breed true.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Unter is our resident Lysenkoist.

Thanks, learned a new word today. I guess my capacity to learn new words was shaped by that 55,510,147 and 148th neurons spinning wildly in the womb instead of something my parents gave me.

It doesn't seem to actually be a word--even the OED only regards it as a derivative of Lysenkoism.

- - - Updated - - -

Genetics has no effect on behavior?

Then what is Down's Syndrome???

 

[untermensche]

Genetics has no effect on behavior?

Then what is Down's Syndrome???

Down's Syndrome is not a behavior.

 

[untermensche]

Are you claiming it has nothing to do with it?

While in womb, babies begin learning language from their mothers

Babies only hours old are able to differentiate between sounds from their native language and a foreign language, scientists have discovered. The study indicates that babies begin absorbing language while still in the womb, earlier than previously thought.

http://www.washington.edu/news/2013/01/02/while-in-womb-babies-begin-learning-language-from-their-mothers/

Cognitive development begins in the womb.

And it responds to external stimulation, not genetic instruction.

All of development takes place within an environment. Nowhere is there just pure genetic expression. There is always genetic expression within an environment.

It has some influence on it, but most of the impact is negative not positive. Lack of nutrients, drug addiction etc, not positive. And that article isn't showing what you want. All it shows is that the development of hearing starts in the womb which is known. It was the big craze with the programs to try and play Mozard and Baby Genius while in utero.

Bad things can happen based on experience, meaning environment, that have nothing to do with genetics.

Expression of cognitive abilities are dependent on experiences that occur at critical stages of development.

It is the same for the expression of things like vision.

Cover a kitten's eyes at critical stages and the cat will never see. The genes are useless.

And other things can happen during those stages that physically affect the development. Prove us all wrong and go and get a PhD in Biological with the thesis that genetics has no affect on behavior.

Prove who wrong? A couple of know-nothings?

You have no argument because it is an insane idiotic position.

Genes give humans the ability to have behavior. They do not spell out which specific behaviors will occur.

They don't determine which language will be spoken. They only give the ability to acquire a language.

 

[iolo]

Where are you getting that stealing was only against elderly parents? Shouldn't the commandment then have been "Though shall not steal against old people?" I do agree that capitalism has slightly changed theft, we now have more stuff to steal.

- - - Updated - - -

The notion of property arises from 'ownership' of land, but where did anyone get that from? Land is just there, and individual property is theft, way back when or yesterday.

Even some animals show land and ownership. Land becoming property is very important in the development of humans because humans only have the ability to live in a few areas without developing property.

How could anybody ever come to own land? They merely occupy it. Property, as you know, is theft.

No. We came to own land as a property of our species and ownership is a key product of humans. Even some other animals understand it, but we are more advanced animals. And no, property is not theft.

Bullshit. Land is just there, so how could some bully-boy come to 'own' it? Male animals have a 'territory' while they are alive, dominant, and after sex, not property.

Humans divy up the resources on the Earth using the concept of property. Are we stealing it from Earth? Does Earth want to come testify in court that humans can't take it?

'Humans' do no such thing - a minority of armed robbers steal from the rest, as you know.

 

[coloradoatheist]

Are you claiming it has nothing to do with it?

While in womb, babies begin learning language from their mothers

Babies only hours old are able to differentiate between sounds from their native language and a foreign language, scientists have discovered. The study indicates that babies begin absorbing language while still in the womb, earlier than previously thought.

http://www.washington.edu/news/2013/01/02/while-in-womb-babies-begin-learning-language-from-their-mothers/

Cognitive development begins in the womb.

And it responds to external stimulation, not genetic instruction.

All of development takes place within an environment. Nowhere is there just pure genetic expression. There is always genetic expression within an environment.

It has some influence on it, but most of the impact is negative not positive. Lack of nutrients, drug addiction etc, not positive. And that article isn't showing what you want. All it shows is that the development of hearing starts in the womb which is known. It was the big craze with the programs to try and play Mozard and Baby Genius while in utero.

Bad things can happen based on experience, meaning environment, that have nothing to do with genetics.

Expression of cognitive abilities are dependent on experiences that occur at critical stages of development.

It is the same for the expression of things like vision.

Cover a kitten's eyes at critical stages and the cat will never see. The genes are useless.

And other things can happen during those stages that physically affect the development. Prove us all wrong and go and get a PhD in Biological with the thesis that genetics has no affect on behavior.

Prove who wrong? A couple of know-nothings?

You have no argument because it is an insane idiotic position.

Genes give humans the ability to have behavior. They do not spell out which specific behaviors will occur.

They don't determine which language will be spoken. They only give the ability to acquire a language.

No, you would have to prove almost everyone wrong in multiple fields that they are wrong. Your position is that of a flat earth.

- - - Updated - - -

Where are you getting that stealing was only against elderly parents? Shouldn't the commandment then have been "Though shall not steal against old people?" I do agree that capitalism has slightly changed theft, we now have more stuff to steal.

- - - Updated - - -

The notion of property arises from 'ownership' of land, but where did anyone get that from? Land is just there, and individual property is theft, way back when or yesterday.

Even some animals show land and ownership. Land becoming property is very important in the development of humans because humans only have the ability to live in a few areas without developing property.

How could anybody ever come to own land? They merely occupy it. Property, as you know, is theft.

No. We came to own land as a property of our species and ownership is a key product of humans. Even some other animals understand it, but we are more advanced animals. And no, property is not theft.

Bullshit. Land is just there, so how could some bully-boy come to 'own' it? Male animals have a 'territory' while they are alive, dominant, and after sex, not property.

Humans divy up the resources on the Earth using the concept of property. Are we stealing it from Earth? Does Earth want to come testify in court that humans can't take it?

'Humans' do no such thing - a minority of armed robbers steal from the rest, as you know.

Thanks for the good laugh. Humans accept the concept of property, only a few minority people don't like you.

 

[iolo]

Are you claiming it has nothing to do with it?

While in womb, babies begin learning language from their mothers

Babies only hours old are able to differentiate between sounds from their native language and a foreign language, scientists have discovered. The study indicates that babies begin absorbing language while still in the womb, earlier than previously thought.

http://www.washington.edu/news/2013/01/02/while-in-womb-babies-begin-learning-language-from-their-mothers/

Cognitive development begins in the womb.

And it responds to external stimulation, not genetic instruction.

All of development takes place within an environment. Nowhere is there just pure genetic expression. There is always genetic expression within an environment.

It has some influence on it, but most of the impact is negative not positive. Lack of nutrients, drug addiction etc, not positive. And that article isn't showing what you want. All it shows is that the development of hearing starts in the womb which is known. It was the big craze with the programs to try and play Mozard and Baby Genius while in utero.

Bad things can happen based on experience, meaning environment, that have nothing to do with genetics.

Expression of cognitive abilities are dependent on experiences that occur at critical stages of development.

It is the same for the expression of things like vision.

Cover a kitten's eyes at critical stages and the cat will never see. The genes are useless.

And other things can happen during those stages that physically affect the development. Prove us all wrong and go and get a PhD in Biological with the thesis that genetics has no affect on behavior.

Prove who wrong? A couple of know-nothings?

You have no argument because it is an insane idiotic position.

Genes give humans the ability to have behavior. They do not spell out which specific behaviors will occur.

They don't determine which language will be spoken. They only give the ability to acquire a language.

No, you would have to prove almost everyone wrong in multiple fields that they are wrong. Your position is that of a flat earth.

- - - Updated - - -

Where are you getting that stealing was only against elderly parents? Shouldn't the commandment then have been "Though shall not steal against old people?" I do agree that capitalism has slightly changed theft, we now have more stuff to steal.

- - - Updated - - -

The notion of property arises from 'ownership' of land, but where did anyone get that from? Land is just there, and individual property is theft, way back when or yesterday.

Even some animals show land and ownership. Land becoming property is very important in the development of humans because humans only have the ability to live in a few areas without developing property.

How could anybody ever come to own land? They merely occupy it. Property, as you know, is theft.

No. We came to own land as a property of our species and ownership is a key product of humans. Even some other animals understand it, but we are more advanced animals. And no, property is not theft.

Bullshit. Land is just there, so how could some bully-boy come to 'own' it? Male animals have a 'territory' while they are alive, dominant, and after sex, not property.

Humans divy up the resources on the Earth using the concept of property. Are we stealing it from Earth? Does Earth want to come testify in court that humans can't take it?

'Humans' do no such thing - a minority of armed robbers steal from the rest, as you know.

Thanks for the good laugh. Humans accept the concept of property, only a few minority people don't like you.

They'd bloody better, since the Al Capones grab everything, elect themselves an aristocracy and kill anyone who objects. Do grow up!