Book/Making Sense of Behavior
7 linked references
November 12th, 2021
Read this very post-average article on the implications o… › PCT—Yeah? So What?! › I was kind of disappointed by it › and there's value to this but I find myself wanting an ar…
- Book/Making Sense of Behavior is pretty good at this, though it does spend a little time discussion the confusions of behaviorism
October 6th, 2021
- notes on Book/Making Sense of Behavior
- > It’s not about predicting.
- Oho, interesting direct contrast w predictive processing
- > The general rule is that if you want to control something, you have to perceive it.
- > You may be listening to the radio or talking to your passenger, and not even notice what this simple control system is so kindly doing for you—as long as you keep one eye on the road
- > This picture of the right path isn’t like a prediction; it’s like a target or a blueprint.
- This is again such an intriguing contrast with the language of predictive processing, directly contradicting it. Ofc, they mean a different thing by "prediction", but it seems to me that PP is making an is/ought error that the PCT frame can much much better distinguish.
- and PP got into its confusion via starting by trying to understand simple perception rather than behavior
- although a question that kinda goes unanswered by the PCT model is how we go about perceiving things we aren't trying to control in the first place, or something
- like, arguably there still needs to be some sort of ontum for it, there's just no reference level at a given moment I guess?
- but that's interesting and points at an important contrast between PCT and PP, where in PP "prediction" is used both for the "is" reference level of pure non-controlling perception and for the "ought" reference level of controlling-perception
- > This [reorganization] process is not intelligent; it is simple and mechanical.
- But you can, more or less, pursue intentional reorganization via therapy etc
- > the best approach is just to say “reorganization” when we mean acquiring a new control skill as a way of satisfying intrinsic needs, and to use “learning” only when we intend to be vague.
September 26th, 2021
- > The idea of control of perception sinks in only slowly. At first,
it gets in the way of everything, When you reach for a drawer to
get a fork, what you've been reading here pops into your head,
and you think “That’s a perception of a drawer and a perception
of a hand reaching toward it; the feeling of pulling the drawer
open is a perception; I’m sorting through perceptions of utensils
to find a perception of a fork, and now I’m trying to make a
perception of my hand with a fork in it...” All this creates a
condition of extreme self-consciousness and artificiality. But if
you go around hanging the label “perception” on everything
you experience, eventually everything will have the same label,
and the label will become unimportant. You'll understand that
it’s all perception the way you understand that your hand has
fingers, but most of the time that bit of knowledge will cease to
be obtrusive and you can go back, almost, to normal life. Even
a baby eventually gets over its fascination with the fact that hands
have fingers, although it never forgets this fact. - > If I am to go by past experience, this is the point where someone
will remind me of something other than these aspects of
psychotherapy that is obviously of critical importance, but until that
happens I will rest my case- resting one's case is an underrated move
- > The big problem (not now, but certainly at one point in your
infant life) is how to use the hand to get the glass where you
want it to be (where you want to perceive it to be, of course, but
we don’t have to keep saying that to the point of being
tiresome—let’s just agree that it’s all perception).- it seems like yes, belaboring it isn't fun
- but if it can be reaffirmed freshly, it's dharma
- a weird review I could make of Book/Making Sense of Behavior
- a book that could inspire someone to think of controlling all of humanity, and then convince him that such a feat would be possible not in spite of but only with utmost respect for dignity and autonomy
September 25th, 2021
- quotes from Book/Making Sense of Behavior, PCT
- > Since the world we experience is the world of perception, it
usually makes little difference whether we say we’re controlling perceptions or controlling the state of the real world. It does, however, make a difference when we try to explain behavior in terms of some physical model of a behaving system. - > The two problems go together: the problem of reaching agreement with each other about reality, and the problem that all perception is fundamentally private. If our perceptions were not private, we would never disagree with each other about the world and its meanings. If they were not, somehow, similar, we wouldn't be able to tell jokes or communicate about anything. It is, of course, possible that our perceptions are both private and similar.