@SoupGuru: Some things obviously have intrinsic value (e.g. food and water) whereas other things obviously have value assigned to them by different groups (e.g. sports cars). This study had to do with the actual neural response to perceived value, which makes its result non-trivial, regardless of how well it meshes with common-sense.
@Rogerborg: I don't really get what you're calling a "false analogy", but I'm assuming you meant my comparing the parent's attitude to Palin's absurd comments about genetic research on fruit flies, since that was the only analogy employed. And I have some time to kill, so... There is no such thing as a "false analogy", only bad analogies. Analogies can be drawn between any two things that share any similarity, and any two things may share some feature. And any analogy, no matter how good, never lends itself to perfect deductive inference, so that all analogies can be regarded as "logical fallacies". Oh, and by the way, they're called logicians. Oh, and you misspelled "big". Dick.
Damn. I've gone and gotten pedantic on the internets again... stupid alcohol.