Stating that the brain is behavior answers many questions concerning the relation of the two constructs. It claims that all constructs controlling behavior can be understood in terms of the brain and that there are external proponents that influence the brain such as culture, environment, genetics, instinct, creativity, and even morality.

The question that remains is where these influences are derived from. Certainly genetics and environment are derived biologically and are thus described in terms of the brain without question.

Where do culture, morality and and creativity derive themselves? In terms of culture, for example: the points of desiring power and order in life can be understood through consideration of survival instinct. HUmans, for example, have developed a culture where education, money, and attracting other human beings is of primary focus. These things are all results of survival. Getting a good education leads to money which in turn leads to well being. What can not be understood in terms of the brain is the reason for which we as humans care so much about surviving.

Through study, certain biological factors such as hormones, can most probably be linked to survival tactics, yet the reason for the body's formation of such is unknown.

A simpler analogy is the reason for which we cry. Biologically speaking, a stimulus, either external or internal, signals sadness or anger to the brain, thus causing the reaction of our tear ducts to generate tears. Why do human beings get sad or angry? It is understood that external factors exist that displease human beings,but why do they displease them as opposed to just motivating them to change their situations?

Therefore, accounting the origins of behavior itself such as emotion to the brain remains in question. Biologically behavior is understood yet the causes of biological function have yet to be resolved if the above theory is to be used.

Interesting issues, which we will try and address. Some of them clearly require an appreciation of evolution. Part of an explanation for what an input is pleasing or displeasing has to do with internal organization of the brain which in turn reflects development which in turn reflects genetic information. But there is more there than that. Why sit and be displeased, as opposed to acting to change things? What distinguishes the two situations? Nice question, let's see if we come up with some sense of an answer for it. PG