Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

At Mind Matters News: The mystery of how newborns know things gets deeper


But learning more about it may help us understand autism spectrum disorders better:

That said, babies are born knowing some things. And this is where Vallortigara’s research gets really interesting:

The same kind of preference [as with chicks] was subsequently discovered in human neonates, as the cognitive neuroscientist Mark Johnson and colleagues showed, based on the newborns’ eye gaze. Recently, my team used EEG to measure electrical activity in the brains of newborns as they saw face-like, inverted face-like, or scrambled face-like configurations, and we found impressive selectivity of response to the first pattern. That is, we observed a significantly stronger change in our measure of cortical activity in response to the upright face-like stimuli, as compared with the other stimuli. We also revealed the involvement of cortical areas that overlap with the adult face-processing circuit. Our findings suggest that the cortical route specialised for face processing is already functional at birth.

Giorgio Vallortigara, “Babies and chicks help solve one of psychology’s oldest puzzles” at Psyche (February 2, 2022)

Babies (and chicks) also preferred biological motion to mechanical motion. How did they know?

Maybe the babies are quick learners. No because, as Vallortigara notes, the preference actually waned as the babies grew older. But then it spiked again at a couple of months of age:

It’s interesting to note that these life-detecting abilities appear to wax and wane as babies age. For instance, the preference for biological motion seems to vanish at one and two months of age in human infants, and then to reappear by three months. A likely explanation is that, at birth, animals possess innate mechanisms that act in a reflex-like manner, serving to direct their attention to relevant stimuli in the environment, such as caregivers. Then a second mechanism, based on learning, might take precedence, allowing more specific recognition – ie, the face of Mom as opposed to a stranger, or the movement of one’s own species as opposed to generic biological motion, and so on.

Giorgio Vallortigara, “Babies and chicks help solve one of psychology’s oldest puzzles” at Psyche (February 2, 2022)

So there are two stages in babies’ recognition of other humans; one is innate and covers the first months of life, gradually waning in favor of the second, which is learned. That may have implications for the detection and early treatment of autism spectrum disorder (ASD)

News, “The mystery of how newborns know things gets deeper” at Mind Matters News (The mystery of how newborns know things gets deeper)

Takehome: An innate program guides newborns to seek human faces and body movements but it wanes in favor of personal learning. But that may take longer for autists.

You may also wish to read: Source of most animal intelligence still a mystery. Eric Cassell takes questions: If life forms are born or hatched knowing this stuff, it isn’t learned. But if it’s in the genes, where is it? Questions range from “Do animals have free will?” through “How do migratory animals adapt to magnetic poll reversals” which may come every 1000 years or so?

The real mystery is why, of all animals, human infants know very little when compared to other species. Only our fellow primates know as little, and while other mammalian orders are born as helpless as we are, that helpless goes away much more rapidly. EvilSnack
Maybe I missed it, but why is it so strange to think that humans are born with some abilities and traits "hard-wired" as it were: eye movement, sucking reflex, crying reflex, swallowing, etc. ?Responding to a face is only a little bit more complex. Certainly seeing "faces" in random configurations is a familiar event for many of us, and recognizing familiar faces is a very particular (and useful) skill that most people have. Of course, our atheistic friends could argue reasonably that all these built-in skills are the results of Darwinian evolution - small tweaks to make survival more likely. I would not attempt to use any such traits as evidence for ID. But maybe I'm missing something? Fasteddious
That said, babies are born knowing some things.
Even knowing how to operate the complex machinery of an arm and hand, which the baby can do before birth - clasping, stretching ... is part of the mystery which remains deep and will probably get deeper the more we study it. Silver Asiatic
Polistra @1 I recent report on prenatal screening for birth defects pointed out problems with accuracy of tests. So many children diagnosed with down syndrome, for example, most likely were misdiagnosed. Some survive pregnancy. But most, as you say, were "elminated"
In Denmark, 98 percent of pregnancies with a Down syndrome diagnosis are terminated. In France, it’s 77 percent, and in the United States it’s 67 percent. In Iceland, the law permits abortions after 16 weeks if the fetus has a deformity.
I have known some kids and now adults with down syndrome. They are joyful and very good people - part of the variety of design, necessary for a healthy civilization. Silver Asiatic
If we're serious about design we'll stop treating variations as disorders requiring drugs and therapy. Variations are part of the design, to insure that the species can adapt to different places and different situations. In mammals, males carry most of the variation because males are intended to be the swarmers and explorers of new territory. Sane civilizations make room for a wide range of variations, with positions and jobs for every type. Globalism considers only one precise set of genes to be optimal. All other skills and personalities are NEGATIVE EXTERNALITIES to be cleansed and disinfected and exterminated. Cleansing starts with drugs and therapy but always ends up with extermination. http://polistrasmill.blogspot.com/2019/02/skill-estate-three-ways.html http://polistrasmill.blogspot.com/2016/02/constants-and-variables-39.html polistra

Leave a Reply