Re: consciousness, was Re: etc.


"J.A. Legris" <jalegris@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1180225392.734283.77960@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

On May 26, 5:49 pm, JGCASEY <jgkjca...@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On May 27, 6:10 am, c...@xxxxxxxx (Curt Welch) wrote:

[...]

Do you honestly have no clue why it works so well even
after Michael explained it to you?

But clearly Michael has not explained it to him otherwise
he would understand. What constitutes an explanation? Is
it not that it changes the behavior of the one to whom
the explanation is directed?

[...]

If you do not understand how to translate an example such
as the one you gave, into the language of behaviorism,
that only shows that you don't understand the language of
behaviorism - or even some of it's most basic concepts.

Just as an explanation in mathematical form my not be
understood because the person does not understand the
language of mathematics or even some of its most basic
concepts.

This is why I asked the question what does "conditioning"
mean, so that I could perhaps understand (be changed) by
the 'explanations'. However no meaning to the word was
given except it was all very complex. In which case why
waste time talking to people who don't understand the
words you use if you are not prepared to explain them?

Think about what might be required to explain the theory
of Relativity. At what level would you explain it? That
would depend surely on the mathematical sophistication
of the person to whom you were trying to explain it.

--
JC

You've experienced another facet of the problem that Curt himself
complained about recently, which is that all this talk of conditional
response probabilities provides almost no guidance for actually
achieving them, leaving him with little more than a guess about a
stucture for his pulse-routing network. The "explanations" offered by
EAB are mainly just observations,



Behavior analysis directly demonstrates the effects of independent
variables. That is the simple fact of the matter. What you say is utter
nonsense.



lacking a crucial component of
empirical science: a theory-laden account of the phenomena underlying
the observations.



1.) There are reasons to do experiments other than to test a theory.

2.) There is plenty of theory in behavior analysis. The theories do not,
however, generally make appeal to "unobservables." Ask yourself this,
Legris, Are the presence of unobservables NESCESSARILY a good thing?
Related to this: are unobservables important at all points in the
development of a science?



The behaviourist may sneer at the mentalistic and
folk-theoretical language that "corrupts" attempts to understand
animal behaviour, but it is done in the still-evolving and best
traditions of science.



You mean "Science according to Legris"? I think you do.



Considereing that science itself is just
another form of animal behaviour, why is it that the behaviourists are
so critical of their subject matter?



1.) Skinner's analysis of the behavior of scientists takes place in the
same terms as behavior in general.

2.) Part of your point above involves the assumption that your implied
description of theory itself, and its relation to scientific endeavor, is
accurate. It isn't.



It's almost as though they don't
really understand it.



You mean in all its complexity? Of course they don't. But compared to the
animism called cognitive "science" - hell, compared to an idiot like you -
well, you get the picture.




--
Joe





.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Word 2003 VB IDE & VB2005
    ... For a good explanation of this, ... Visual Studio Magazine - Guest Opinion - Office and .NET: ... Very little, if anything, has changed in the language since the ... The most recent one I enjoyed was "Professional Excel ...
    (microsoft.public.word.vba.general)
  • Re: consciousness, was Re: etc.
    ... What constitutes an explanation? ... been writing in a foreign language. ... The basics of conditioning are simple and trivial. ...
    (comp.ai.philosophy)
  • Re: Help Constructing Fictional Cross-Religious Movement
    ... >feature of the explanation of "what's an object?" ... >this is a crucial distinction, and tend to think it's already implied by ... just a subroutine in a language that implicitly makes multiple independent ...
    (rec.arts.sf.composition)
  • Re: consciousness, was Re: etc.
    ... What constitutes an explanation? ... as the one you gave, into the language of behaviorism, ... behaviorism - or even some of it's most basic concepts. ... traditions of science. ...
    (comp.ai.philosophy)
  • Re: Darwins principle of divergence - Tautology
    ... so that the Samarin and Goodman explanations do not apply. ... linguists can transcribe my language but seem to terrified ... I would not count that as an explanation, ... Language not used to communicate between people - and the research amongst the Pentacostians shows that they do not understand each other either - is not a language that linguistics can say much about. ...
    (talk.origins)