Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> But, personally, I think if a behaviour is learned rather than e.g. a genetically programmed reflex, it's useful to draw a line between them and say that the former isn't biological in origin.

That will lead you into all kinds of obvious mistakes. The things you're capable of learning are set by your biology too.



The line I draw has never resulted in me being unaware of that.

(Rather the opposite: I have a long-standing fascination with the idea of genuinely unthinkable thoughts, thoughts which cannot be had no matter what).

So, while I would for example say that my capacity for complex language is biological in origin, I think it is more useful to describe my knowledge of Esperanto as not biological in origin.


The biology will give you the capability but not what you actually learn from others. That is called culture I believe.


Ever seen two people read the same story, watch the same TV show, or observe the same real-life event, and come to opposite conclusions?


Frequently, but even just priming is sufficient to cause that observation. The existence of magnetic hysteresis doesn't make it pointless to draw a line between natural and artificial magnets.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: