A model for the organization of language in the adult humans brain is derived from electrical stimulation mapping of several language-related functions: naming, reading, short-term verbal memory, mimicry of orofacial movements, and phoneme identification during neurosurgical operations under local anesthesia. A common peri-Sylvian cortex for motor and language functions is identified in the language dominant hemisphere, including sites common to sequencing of movements and identification of phonemes that may represent an anatomic substrate for the “motor theory of speech perception.” This is surrounded by sites related to short-term verbal memory, with sites specialized for such language functions as naming or syntax at the interface between these motor and memory areas. Language functions are discretely and differentially localized in association cortex, including some differential localization of the same function, naming, in multiple languages. There is substantial individual variability in the exact location of sites related to a particular function, a variability which can be partly related to the patient's sex and overall language ability and which may depend on prior brain injury and, perhaps subtly, on prior experience. A common “specific alerting response” mechanism for motor and language functions is identified in the lateral thalamus of the language–dominant hemisphere, a mechanism that may select the cortical areas appropriate for a particular language function.

There is a tension between normative and descriptive elements in the theory of rational belief. This tension has been reflected in work in psychology and decision theory as well as in philosophy. Canons of rationality should be tailored to what is humanly feasible. But rationality has normative content as well as descriptive content.

A number of issues related to both deductive and inductive logic can be raised. Are there full beliefs – statements that are categorically accepted? Should statements be accepted when they become overwhelmingly probable? What is the structure imposed on these beliefs by rationality? Are they consistent? Are they deductively closed? What parameters, if any, does rational acceptance depend on? How can accepted statements come to be rejected on new evidence

Should degrees of belief satisfy the probability calculus? Does conformity to the probability calculus exhaust the rational constraints that can be imposed on partial beliefs? With the acquisition of new evidence, should beliefs change in accord with Bayes' theorem? Are decisions made in accord with the principle of maximizing expected utility? Should they be?

A systematic set of answers to these questions is developed on the basis of a probabilistic rule of acceptance and a conception of interval-valued logical probability according to which probabilities are based on known frequencies. This leads to limited deductive closure, a demand for only limited consistency, and the rejection of Bayes' theorem as universally applicable to changes of belief. It also becomes possible, given new evidence, to reject previously accepted statements.