But this is a confusipn. We may be genetically disposed to manifest traits in certain environments, just as I have a genetic predisposition to grow to 5'10" ina n environmentw here there was proper nutrition, less in one where there wasn't. My genetic predispotions are precisely NOT those that are manifested in all environments or regardless of the envirinments. This is your confusion. A genetic predisposition is a disposition to manifest a trait in an environment.
In
> isolation kids with still make up their own
> languge....albeit the capacity
> will be signifigantly impaired but it will still
> exhibit itslef.
That's not how the innateness reserach is done. Chomsky doesn't study feral children, he does math and applies it to languages tahta re spoken by social beings. Feral children, btw, do not learn language, you can''t "make up your own language," that silly idea was put paid by Wittgenstein.
> admittedly it would be very difficult to find a
> 'gay' gene....but that
> doesn't make the question over whether it exists or
> not nonsensical.
I never said it was. There may be a gene or many that all and only gays have,a nd which helps expalinw hy they are gay.
i
> mean how was the issue over innate language capacity
> examined? by
> examining behavior where social environment was non
> existant or minimal.
Not at all.
> my thinking is that if sexual preference was innate
> it would be so for
> everyone.
Gaaa. Another congfsuion. You use thing almost meaningness word "innate," which is not a biological term, first to mean "rigidly manifested in all environments" or maybe "manifested apart from social environments" (though how you could tell what someone's sexual preferences were apart from others, that is asocially, I do not know),a nd now you use it to mean "universal." Byt even if there were something that was innate in the first sense, which is incoherent, that would be no reason to think that it was innate in the second sense.
i'm
> inclined to think that
> sexual preference is more like a specific language
> rather than a capacity
> or genetic trait. people aren't genetically
> predisposed towards speaking
> slang or a certain dialect just that they are
> genetically predisposed
> towards speaking something.
This is the first sensible thing you have said in this discussion. You might be right, might not, but one might actually study this. Not, however, by raising feral children and seeing what they wanted to fuck, if anything.
jks
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search http://shopping.yahoo.com