Getting it right: thoughts and feelings

July 15, 2013

Getting it right: thoughts and feelings

Behaviorists have not seen or imagined mobility as a function of attraction. We need cumulative curves with mobile healthy animals, so scientists could collaborate and describe external causes for locomotion and  spread this knowledge. Human history shows diverse groups can be conceptually unified.

The future of behaviorism depends on consensus over feeling and thoughts, shown or voiced daily and written in newspapers and professional journals. Many people stress a rich inner life yet rarely ask how hidden emotions or opinions contribute to socialization, particularly in education. In reality, social reinforcements strengthen partnerships: parent and toddler, student and teacher. Like other mortals, behaviorists show how they feel and explain what they think; this comes with the territory.

When hopes are shared, brainwash has nothing in common with educational practice. Behavior analysis differs from physics in that researchers and subject matters interact. Pavlov taught dogs to anticipate tidbits, and surprisingly, his data can be presented in cumulative form. Skinner taught animals to manipulate keys under reinforcement schedules. Sidman warns against coercive solutions, Extensive research with multiple baselines revives free operant conditioning, with meaningful questions for teachers: When and where do subjects stay well and attentive? What attracts them from a distance?

  

  

NOT QUITE AS I THOUGHT 

Yesterday, I spoke with someone about about Pavlov's work and activating salivary glands
but we didn't get to talk about adrenaline.

Instead, we discussed input & output in connection with the sense of smell and hearing.
He thought sound waves enter the ear. And that when smelling, molecules in the air also come in and out of the nose.

I should have replied, the air that enters - and thus activates cells - is not the same air that comes out; carbon dioxide exits and oxygen comes in.
Water, and nutrients too, enter the body and exit in different form.
Whereas sound waves don't go into the body or pass through the head.
Sounds vibrate the ear drums ( the 'tympanic membranes') and are emitted from the larynx or voice box in the form of 'echos' , imitation or reverberation; 'mands' or questions; and 'tacts', or statements.   ________________________________________________________________
Skinner bowled me over with the truth of the matter, speech, language, verbal behavior:
dialogue implicates at least two individuals, not necessarily members of one species.
________________________________________________________________

The above applies as well to light and sight:

2 people can observe things and events independently (on their own) and agree over what they saw.

And when face-to-face, persons can see and hear each other ... may look and listen to one another,
at the same time ... which is why we need further analysis and why it was necessary in the first place.

In summary:  an experimental analysis was necessary in circa 1900 when Pavlov measured
the psychic secretion, in healthy and conscious animals, one gland and one animal at a time.

And in 1938, when Skinner accumulated repetitive movements of visible body parts in whole and single - and fully aware - individual organisms who are perceivable with the naked eye; they are not a microscopic subject matter.

And in 1956, when his CASE HISTORY IN SCIENTIFIC METHOD was published ....
a history that caught my interest in circa 1970.

And to this day, those methods are called for and could be extended.

We need scientists to study the contingencies for teaching by modelling and learning to emulate
- or replicate - conduct that members of animal groups appear to exhibit with more mutual trust
and collective benefits than those displayed in some common human relationships. 

Conclusion: describing what humans do to help each other can inspire general comprehension.
  

Well, well!

 

Pavlov's experiments and implications therefrom...

Pavlov really did lay the foundation for an innovative, complementary, medicine;

psychosomatic psychiatry.  He showed it possible to activate a gland from afar.

On condition the animals are conscious and healthy and expect something good;

or know something tasty is coming and remember what happened at other times.

Otherwise, they'd never have looked at the place where meat powder is about to

appear, while licking their lips vigorously!
_______________________________

Maybe people will say, "We know that already; like adrenaline: fight and flight." .

"Right!" I shall reply:

"And hence, we don't need more science for fleeing or fighting.  We know how to

warn others of what will happen if they don't obey orders or don't stop hurting us, 

About warfare, we know more than enough."

What we need is co-operative science on how to keep wise and healthy in a changing

environment. Comimg around to the same point - time and again - can be wonderful!

As Winston Churchill recommended:
"If you have an important point to make, don't try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time, a tremendous whack."

Pavlov's data make a pivotal point: glands are affected from outside the head. The implications
of external control over brain function - during social relationships - call for global recognition.

The Idea Never Entered My Head

COMING TO TERMS

June 16: For S-R psychologists, response stands for output and stimulus for input, and when the one cannot be accounted for in terms of the other, mediating activities are again invented.

BF Skinner: The Behavior of Organisms, Preface p. X1

_______

June 10: I think I did have an inkling of where I was going with my graphs, but it was merely a fleeting thought … flimsy… fragile … transient.

Reversing the original link between cause-and-effect is like placing the carrots above the soil and putting all the green leaves deep into the earth.

_______

June 12: I shall practice what I preach; instead of ‘ tit for tat’ I shall repeat my wants, hopes, purposes, et cetera… make quite sure I write the truth, again and again… and that it is kind.

And when I started this, the term ‘absolutely true’ came to mind; and then I wrote:

In life, ‘everything is relative’ becomes ‘most of what we know is absolutely true’. For example: every person has a name, everyone is born a baby, human beings have 10 toes and 10 fingers, books are printed, paper is manufactured from trees, plants provide us with oxygen and we provide them with CO2…

“The whole truth?" Too much!

The ugly truth we don’t want or need so urgently as the good truth all around.

Henc: ‘moderation in all things’ may be questioned.

At times ‘extreme’ , ‘radical’,’ absolute’ are better!

     Existing words must mean something and the longer their history, the more interesting, curious and exciting, their meaning: one comprehends what people are looking at and when they were absolutely wrong and the opponents absolutely right.

_______

June 16: Well, I never! I found: Tit for tat Synonyms, Tit for tat, Antonyms|Thesaurus.com

And amongst the verbs, there was: equal, alternate, reciprocate and it was only then that the idea occurred to me: ‘reciprocal’ may also denote bad for both sides. I wasn’t thinking properly or perhaps I simply forgot 

Perhaps only human beings do so? No.

Two animals of one species may fight each other to the death; and that’s not the worst that can happen. There are life-styles ‘worse than death’: both could remain lonely, crippled and suffering; dependent on others for warmth, feeding, hygiene, company - bad, mad, sad, miserable, depressed - And then suddenly realized: Good heavens! Even for those of us in such a state, ABAs have made living visibly easier and worthwhile.

And other professionals as well; and not only they: many others too, some volunteer knowingly, others help on the spur of a moment … just doing what comes naturally … and yet, only the bad is of interest and the good is simply taken for granted.

The truth is the best and the funniest: ideas never enter the head - not literally - even when we feel that’s where they are; sound waves reverberate and personal voices emerge from the larynx.

We think ideas exit and enter the head, yet they are outside;. and even beyond us preserved in written form!     

There are more thinkers with a helpful influence than we human mortals ever dreamed.

ANIMAL RIGHTS

If  it  were  not  for  human  beings -- there'd  be  no  books  and  no  sciences.
No electricity, no walking on the moon - no Exploration of Planets in Space.
No veterinary surgery to relieve pain and suffering, ease the life of animals.
And so much more - so very much more - it is hard to imagine planet Earth
without human kindness, compassion, feeling for others. 
That is the sunny side of humanity.

The dark side however, also exists.
Man's inhumanity to man is no secret and neither is cruelty to anumals within
laboratory experiments. Animals are still being abused in the name of science.
In her Introduction to the book, NEXT OF KIN, by Roger Fouts (1997)
Jane Goodall recounts:

' For more than a decade I have been begging Roger Fouts to get this
book written. It is the story of a scientific experiment that has helped
us to better understand our own place in relation to the rest of the
animal kingdom and, at the same time, reveals a dark and ugly aspect
of the scientific method.' 

Self interest, arrogance, notions of racial superiority, are part of that history
and they come from inorance, misguided faith in coercion, misplaced stress
on competition among individuals.
Scientists don't need information on how to make animals sick, in order to
to find cures for human diseases and harmful habits.

Scientists need reliable knowledge about normalcy.
Functional behavior analysis with healthy, fully aware, and mobile, animals.
Psychosomatic medicine where physiological effects are taken seriously as
caused by what persons see and hear, around them. Words are intangible,
yet they most certainly affect humans for the better.
In point of fact other creatures are also controlled by conditioned sounds.
Today is the time for environmentalists to unite for a more humane world!

A SUMMARY OF 70 POSTINGS

Knock, knock! Who’s there?

Hugh.

Hugh who?

Human thinkers coming together for civil rights.

Knock, knock!

Who’s there?

Annie.

Annie who?

Animals, we want more space and free choices.

Knock, knock!

Who’s there?

Anna.

Anna who?

Analysis, open up boxes and switch on the lights.

Words are miraculous! 

Words give us wings to fly over hills and green valleys,

above continents ... silently ... over the trees ... 

whispering over the rainbow and the masses of clouds

just happy memories and wonderful dreams ...

Good heavens!

All that without moving an inch away from my chair. 

People

What counts as behavior?

The question has troubled behaviorists since 1984 when it appeared in a journal [i] and I began writing reminders. Now I realize I've  had my say and shall reply shortly in the spirit in which ABAI [ii] is calling for posters in an upcoming conference [iii]

In psychology what counts as behavior is anything people do, including those who do the counting.
Not being people, physiological cells and organs are discounted as behaving individuals.

The Behavior of Organisms

B.F. Skinner is the scientific anchor who keeps my head above water in an ocean of abstractions [iv].

In animal-conditioning laboratories, cumulative records are historical turning points in psychology: since the 1930s, while printing the data on paper for professional interpretation, they show every   subjects' response rate is affected by environmental contingencies,

And still researchers and practitioners continue to puzzle over 'behavior'. Consenssus is necessary. 
I am convinced Skinner might yet come to the rescue and assist in resolving this issue right now and here:

"A Definition of Behavior : Behavior is what an organism is doing - or more accurately what it is observed by another organism to be doing."

This fits the idea that acids and brains don't see or hear, nor look or listen to each other as do organisms with eyes and ears in a head that they turn up and down and from side to side.
The next excerpt is also persuasive:

"By behavior, then, I mean simply the movement of an organism or of its parts in a frame of reference provided by the organism itself or by various external objects or fields of force. "

Even without added emphasis, that takes us into operant settings where a subject's body parts move the keys that print the records which demonstrate cause-and-effects chains ... a main aim in basic science and in applications therefrom.   

All the same, Skinner added a caveat to his initial definition of behavior:

"But to say that a given sample of activity falls within the field of behavior simply because it normally comes under observation would misrepresent the significance of this property.  It is more to the point to say behavior is that part of the functioning of an organism which is engaged in acting upon or having commerce with the outside world."

Perhaps he meant inner entities don't make paths or build dwellings like people and animals do.
In any case, there is a question as to what humans can and cannot observe with the naked eye.
At the upcoming conference, such themes are close to my heart. Therefore, I offer additional thoughts, wishing to attract readers' interest and cause curious souls to wonder where they come from.  
January 9, 2013:
I simplified the above introduction, in view of the controversy as to 'variabilty' in
The Behavior Analyst, 2012, 15, received yeterday. 

Re: Consciousness and Private Events

Pavlov relinquished vivisection for research with fully conscious subjects and preferably cheerful. From my nursing days, I think physicians could assist in this area: 'unconscious' usually means patients no longer respond to audio-visual stimulation, nor to touch. Thus consciousness is akin to awareness, inasmuch as we say people are aware of things we may show and tell them.

'Subconscious' knowing sounds more optimistic since normal, healthy persons are also involved.

As for personal privacy, I believe our skin and our skull function like boundaries. People are solid, not transparent, so we don't really see each other's insides.
In ordinary circumstances, I don't even feel what happens in my own body. Only when something is especially painful or shocking or (on the contrary) joyful or interesting, do I notice anything going on in my head and my body (for instance: palpitations, dry tongue, shaky voice, weak muscles). I assume others don't see my physiology either; not without x-rays, stethoscopes, and so forth. The most they could do would be to feel - with the aid of their fingers - my heart pulsing along, There are also close hugs through which I can sense the heart of a child beating strong.

All that was brought home to me when I was imagining a scared "Mrs. Rat" whom I had visualized

running away from a lever where she'd been shocked, her heart pumping fast in panic.

Later, I understood why we humans so frequently try hiding our thoughts and feelings:

we already know others can see us move, do hear what we say and may read what we write.

Yet they may not approve, so we have to be careful when, where and how much, we pretend.

At the end of the day, everyone needs credibility, we don't want to lose people's trust.

Persons tend to blame scientists for oversights, perhaps equating science with errorless learning.

Researchers however, are not infallible and particularly not when exploring unfamiliar territory.

   

Re: Patterns of Explanation in Behavior Analysis

Pavlov made history with psychosomatic effects: external stimuli affect animals and inner glands.

Skinner discovered events outside have characteristic results, irrespective of species membership.

Sidman highlights the importance of systematic replications for evaluating psychological data.

And I believe Sidman's search for Unsolved Puzzles [v] may help unite nations, in the way they

see themselves as human beings, mammals and vertebrates, members of the animal kingdom.

I wouldn't argue with scientists, had I not seen the flow of cause-and-effect in experimental analysis

of behavior:  from remote conditions, to the animals and via the brain, into physiological systems.
And this, while keeping animals fit and providing information for functional, face-to-face, interaction

that might yet generate normal and healthy socialisation, on a very large scale.

Rhetoric

Where there's a cause for a will, there's a way to delay.

Naturally, persons agree that lessening pain, sorrow, hostility, would be a good thing for humanity.

So why shouldn't more people campaign against cruelty, when millions are already voting for more peace and equality? The findings from conditioning experiments are valid in theory, reliable in practice and viable from a radical philosophical point of view which gives credit where credit is due: to environmental qualities.

Those who claim otherwise [vi], never recognize the language of reciprocal social reinforcement.

Furthermore, their forecasts are premature since individuals in groups, have not yet been studied experimentally. With regard to modeling and learning through emulation and observation, knowledge is missing. We need to replicate the conditions that generate and maintain cooperation amongst naive and experienced experimental subjects.

The trouble is forgetfulness.  Nevertheless, since scientists carefully chart their work, readers can refresh collective memories and remind others: report past achievements, the professional literature exists! [vii]
That seems to have become my mission.
Mottos I like are: 'Humans Are Born Innocent Of Sin'; 'Liberate the Operant!';  'Towards Freedom and Dignity'; 'Science For A More Humane World!'

There was a time when operant conditioners acknowledged the organism as a unit for analysis.
Nowadays they seldom mention anyone in connection with behavior, not even animal subjects.

Yet, together with human researchers, animals are the essential participants in behavior science.

Without them, no bar-press, no behavior or movement, nothing to go on, no talk about feelings - much less, write or translate into other words, or infer and imply, or compare.

Sidman gently reminds us: "Good data are good data, regardless of theory..."

And yet should good data lead to the theory and in the vernacular, this is great.

Sidman presents an unsolved problem concerning "voluntary control" :

"... the problem will not be solved on the basis of Pavlovian conditioning alone, since this type of conditioning fails to tell us how the controlling word... itself comes to be strengthened."

Mellow as Dr. Sidman, readers may resonate to this:

So long as you count the dogs who react to what scientists show and tell them, Pavlovian conditioning can tell us how the controlling word is strengthened. I am relieved to report that people readily conceptualise words as 'conditioned stimuli'; and - theoretically - as 'conditioned reinforcers'.

As for cognitive terms in everyday language, Skinner's early warnings are understandable, in view of the confusion between cause and effect in psychological circles, over the centuries to the present day.

And as for private thinking and feeling why should we pick on behaviorists' error, when the entire world falls into the same trap, again and again? We can admit speaking and listening to others is plainly common 'verbal behavior', and covert talking to oneself is not objective like playing football.

We could confess that unless we know when others are pleased or disappointed, neither Stick nor Carrot will work for us - or them - or indeed, anyone.

On TV, recently, I heard this great introduction to a documentary on the formation of life on our planet:
'Earth is the birthplace of the human race.'

This sentence could provide a springboard for seeking ... and finding ... solutions to the issues regarding supposedly primary controlling roles of seeds and DNA that appear in literary and professional texts.

Mark Twain, good-natured wordsmith and environment-friendly, says it well:

Don't go around saying the world owes you a living.  The world owes you nothing.  It was here first.

In my blog postings I poured out my soul over the power of words as conditioned sounds; whichever way humans behave ... stay put or move, air or hide thoughts and feelings ... whatever we do, can be caused by words ... whose meanings are conditioned ... starting at birth.

For one of the most remarkable testimonies to what human beings are capable of, I recommend:
Izzeldin Abuelaish (2011) I SHALL NOT HATE

At times, persons understand more from humorous hints than from precise statements. Somehow, absurdities seem to cut through many words and come straight to the point. In conclusion, I offer the following  

The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich and the poor alike to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread.

Of the Sun and the Moon, the Moon is plainly the more important, as it provides us with light when it is dark and not needed, whereas the Sun appears only in the daytime when it is light anyhow.

And finally: When a thing has been said and well said, have no scruple, take it and copy it.  ' Nuff said!

_____________________________________

References

[i]   The Behavioral and Brain Sciences (1984) 7:4, pages 715; 722;

[ii]  The Association for Behavior Analysis International

[iii] The Conference Theory and Philosophy, Santa Fe, NM; November 2-4, 2012

[iv] Though in 1984, critical waves upset even Skinner and I shied away from showing his error.

        Today I believe he would be pleased and agree: "the essence of behavior is the organism".

[v]  Murray Sidman (2012) Unsolved Puzzles: Where to Find Them?  

          European Journal of Behavior Analysis, 13, 137-140

[vi]  For instance: "Wars are inevitable"; or: "People understand only the language of force."

[vii] For example: Ayllon & Azrin (1968) The Token Economy; A Motivational System For
       Therapy and Rehabilitation

23 August, 2012.