As I recall from my undergraduate days imprinting was coined by Lorenz and it went on through several itterations (preparedness). Basically I was alluding to the way chicks will 'imprint' on the mother bird and follow mum around.
But the chicks would imprint on anything that they saw in a pretty defined period of their development. So you could argue that their brains are prepared for a mother figure and will imprint on anything about the right size that is not trying to eat them.
Now you
could argue that humans are prepared to recognise other intelligent action. If we see the long grass moving we can conclude it is the wind (most likely) or a stalking lion (which is capable of intentional action). This is a good way to not get eaten by erring on the side of caution as we over estimate the 'intent' there is in the environment (this would have survival value).
This is where my idea goes
way specualative:
If our brains are prepared to conclude intent it will do so starting with the most obvious source of intent e.g. other people. Take away the people and our intent detection software seeks out the next most obvious source of intent untill we become so satrved of intentional stimulus that we percieve intent when there is none.
A bit like the hallucinations you get from sensory depriviation.
Anyway, people do get lonely and are (apparently) more likely to conclude 'god' when they are and it could be tied into our preparedness to conclude intent.
Phew, started at imprinting and got to concluding intent! Does that mean by my own definition I'm lonely? My girlfriend is working late and my dvd stand is telling me to stop typing.
™ Version 4.2
