In reply to cathsullivan:
> This idea is currently quite fashionable again (especially in relation to 'the brain'). But I'd favour the less fashionable, yet better evidenced, explanation that all of our behaviours are a product of a complex interaction of a large array of factors. And it's always important to remember that our 'biology' is shaped by our behaviour and the context in which we live.
Surely all our behaviours are by definition explained by 'our biology'? We are biological creatures and whatever we do is constrained by, and caused by, that fact. On the other hand, the connectome of our brain is by definition a product of the environment and so to separate what is 'biological' from what is anything else (environmental? social?) makes no sense. I think we probably agree here, I just consider the job lot to be 'our biology' since I don't see what else we have...our whole social world is a part of our biology.
> Interesting to see how functional imaging might provide a vivid picture of the idea that the very bold are 'not wired up properly'. I guess it's another reason why we shouldn't necessary simplistically compare our own efforts and experiences with very famous (and perhaps by definition atypical) climbers.
I don't know why we'd expect Honnold's brain to be showing objective signs of fear (amygdala activation) when he's doing something that's just what he does and he's perfectly capable of not falling off. It's like anything, when you're out of your depth you're terrified, but when you know what you're doing it's just another day in the office. Yes, he does appear to be a particularly low temperature dude, but that's what you see in every interview, etc.
It is fascinating to see the neural correlates of personality, behaviour and experience - but it isn't surprising!
Post edited at 20:29