THOUGHT-READING: continued...

On the TV National Geographic Channel, they keep saying:
If we stop being curious, we might as well give up.
My thoughts don't interest scientists and yet I do have some news that could please them.
Considering far-reaching implications of behavior quantification, yes indeed I'm surprised.

Who'd have thought counting drops of saliva or recording how many times per minute rats
move their paw, can add anything to explain natural, freely flowing, human communication!

Animal conditioners could teach how to keep subjects active and healthy and stationary in
one place; how to keep them attentive and listening, motivated and interested, and so forth.
The old and the young, the injured or mentally retarded, need such a special technology as
much as fit and strong populations whose pace is too fast, not to mention those individuals
whose careless misbehaviors worry parents and teachers, governments, environmentalists,
applied behavior analysts and  /medical /surgical/ specialists dealing with rehabilitation.

The fact is Pavlov's data demonstrate long-distance dialogue between a dog and a scientist.
Conditioners might say that, under similar circumstances, human individuals will understand
as much as the experimental canines do.
Readers can rest assured: I am no genius, nor was I born with this insight. What I need now
is some interest and willingness to listen.
No scientist asks where my knowledge comes from, thus I am obliged to reveal my sources
and blow my own horn:
I know the dogs drool with pleasure and connect a tone with the food just because scientists
themselves associated them, spatially and temporally, as well as consistently.
Pavlov's and Skinner's writing reminded me of the facts. 
Food always appears in the same place, and that is where the animals focus their eyes while
a gland secretes copious saliva; at the same time, they prick up their ears, wag their tail and
lick their lips. There is the evidence that they think the food is about to arrive!
Teachers in classrooms and kindergartens smile when I wish children had ears like dogs: we'd
tell at a glance that they're listening. perhaps, if we wagged a tail or purred like a cat, we might
find it easier to express our emotions at appropriate moments.
Even so, the thought-reading that goes on among humans is pretty amazing.

Apropos questions left open in the THOUGHT-READING Blog Post on May 3, 2011

- What does a salivary reflex imply about the brain and the nerve cells?
I think one answer is: the brain and the nervous system are naturally affected by what
people and animals see and hear, watch and expect.

- What is the difference between a 'mental' and a physical explanation?
Perhaps, the term 'mental' evolved from the fact that light and sound are not substantial:
no visible size, shape or weight.  Yet the materials are physical, so physical explanations
may also be psychological and vice versa: psychological explanations are also physical.

- How may we go beyond Pavlov's findings to the events in day-to-day living?
Conditioned sounds are meaningful words, and tones, which adults and babies learn to pronounce
and understand. Therefore individuals stimulate one another and may elicit glandular secretions
by activating brain, nerves and muscles. Physiologists might be keen to study brain function
together with behavior scientists who know how to maintain subjects' interest and attention.
I have thought of words causing people grief and tears and wrote about 'less intimidation',
and others write better than I ever could:
".... wild creatures of the jungle often eat from his hand , or permit him to caress them freely ....   he
feels a close tie of kinship with them; together they share the strange and marvelous gift of life. Their
life is doubtless as significant to them as his life is to him. They have the same right to consideration,
respect and , where possible, affection."
" Asked at a meeting where he was about to speak how he should be introduced, Schweitzer replied:
'Oh. tell them that this fellow over there who looks like a shaggy dog is Albert Schweitzer.'
The pleasantry was uttered by a man who has almost always had dogs around him, and who would
not consider it an insult to be likened to a dog. When Mrs. C.E.B. Russell, one of his gifted translators,
visited him in Africa and was put in charge of  a gang of workmen, she asked Schweitzer how she was
to discharge her responsibilities.
                'That's very simple,' he said, 'Just imagine yourself a shepherd with a flock of sheep, and act
accordingly. Then everything will be all right.' " 

- How do we distinguish a medical from a psychological diagnosis? And prognosis?
Physicians diagnose causes of physio-organic problems, psychologists diagnose causes outside
the individual, for instance:  /a severe shock/ or /excessive criticism and insufficient encouragement./
If necessary, physicians and psychologists work together. Prognosis for cures might be better
-- in medical and behavioral and psychological fields -- if the environmental effects on bodies
and souls were common knowledge. To my mind /souls/ denotes /individuals/ as for example,
"no one's around" means: "אין נפש חיה";  "not a soul to be seen"; "keine Seele zu sehen"; and then the
term "soulmates" refers to " friends who see eye to eye"; and "with heart and soul" is the metaphor
which implies "thinking strongly" and "feeling sincerely" and "doing something enthusiastically".
Doubtless others can talk and write about language with more charm and authority than I can.
Readers could do so here; it can be up-lifting: I am confident they will unite mind, body and soul.