Reply to comment

I'm am trying to go back to the “Harvard Law of Animal Behavior”, and agree as some mentioned above that this means that it is possible that animals will behave whatever way it please--whether there is a motivation (input) or not. However going back to the example of a baby, it will cry for various reasons---some that we may not know as we probably cannot remember what we may have been thinking when we were young. However generally people who have experiences with babies have found that either the baby cries for milk, or to get changed, or because they may be uncomfortable in a certain position. As the baby matures and becomes a toddler the kid has made an observation that every time he/she cries, they will get attention. It reminds me when I was little and I would cry and sometimes when my dad would ask why my mom would sometimes just claim "for no reason at all but attention"--however my wanting of attention is still an underlying reason/motivation so doesn't that count as a possible input.

I am reading from a lot of people that the term input/output are challenging as we often think about math, computer science or something mechanical--however I would propose that it input could be analogous with the term motivation, and behavior would be analogous with output. The motivation could be physical or mental.

Now going back to the arrangment of each individuals neurons and whether people from the same culture/religion share the same arrangement of neurons--I think this is quite possible depending on the different influences, such as how they came about learning about the certain culture or religion. I would argue that it may be one thing to identify yourself with a culture or religion--but mentality wise you may be on a different page altogether. It is our experiences that influence our different motivations and produce different behaviors--thus the way we may perceive or understand content may vary from someone else.