Posts tagged ‘relativism’

behaviorism, a simplistic view

 

Behaviorism

 

Behaviorism says that if there are consistent results to actions, then there will be consistent, predictable behavioral results (mostly based on the classification of the results, it would seem). If the results are inconsistent, you’re liable to have inconsistent actions with regard to whatever, particularly if the payoff is really big. (That means that even though they’re liable to lose at whatever, people keep doing things—because they find that reward so delightfully irresistible. The existence of this tendency gives real strength to the argument that at least for some people, for pleasure to be complete, there must be something usually considered negative.

 

Bear in mind it definitely can be argued that a lot of this involves words rather than real things. I’ve known a couple of the people who need pain and such. I don’t think they totally understood it either, but one thing definitely involved that I never saw brought up by one of those studies was that there was a sense of humor involved.

 

One thing society definitely is, is consistent actions. That is one component of stability.

 

Tidbit.

 

–Glenn

July 2, 2008 at 9:38 pm Leave a comment

new poetry

This is stuff that only made it to my diary-of-sorts, which automatically means rather a high mortality rate.  At least until someone might find it long after the fact.  Whatever.  The meanings we perceive are first of all determined by frames of relevance–determinism by means of expression.  The kinds of things we are taught to consider our identity are at most fragments of its expression.  And civilization consists most of all in the successful maintenance of multiple personalities, after all.

 

Gah.

———————————————————–

to a beautiful woman

 

sketched in mid

flight

for all to guess or see

i wonder which defines,

self

or beauty.

————————————————————————–

wordinesses

 

touched tongued and grooved

these surfaces meet

and to speak of resolution

is at end fruitless.

 

defining, we

most of all

define ourselves

 

[[I really think I’ve posted that before.  But then I don’t.  Certainly I’ve maundered a lot about the obvious subject recently.]]

————————————————————————

i don’t know, really

if these words

should be lashed out

at all near

 

or simply leashed,

leaving

me in

a sullen-seeming

silence.

—————————————————————

Glenn

That last is a bit more cryptic, and then not.  Given that one defines oneself by expression (words, means of delivery, appearance), the succession of silence means…

–At least I’m no longer a criminal for being epileptic.  That really did irritate me, for some reason.  I know it shouldn’t have; it really didn’t make any difference.  I wouldn’t have driven in any case, and so on.  I’m also really, really glad that I don’t suffer from PTSD as badly as I did for the first few years after returning from Vietnam.  I was sane enough to just shrug and act as if I were on probation, keep my mouth pretty well shut and definitely stay out of trouble.  I did, and it’s over.

 

June 22, 2008 at 6:19 pm Leave a comment