| |
 |
|
|
Science Forum Index » Cognitive Science Forum » Environmental Contingencies
Page 1 of 2 Goto page 1, 2 Next
|
| Author |
Message |
| Lester Zick |
 Posted: Wed Dec 17, 2003 11:04 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Environmental Contingencies
I believe that in the view of behaviorism, behavior is caused by or
determined by environmental contingencies or circumstances. And what I
would like to know is what the mechanics are between environmental
contingencies that cause or determine behavior?
Now let me be clear here that this is a simple question and one not
intended to ask for the whole sequence of behavior causation. I'm just
interested in what type of mechanics apply between environmental
contingencies or circumstances in terms of one another such that
behavior results in accordance with those mechanics.
For if the answer is that the mechanics involved are just those of
equal and opposite reaction type material interactions studied by the
physical sciences, then this indicates that the doctrinal foundation
for behaviorism represents a materialist variant of copy theory.
But if not then I would have to suggest that the mechanics involved
have to be differential in nature and have to reflect some variant of
differential mechanics and cognition instead.
Regards - Lester |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Dave Ulmer |
| Posted: Wed Dec 17, 2003 11:55 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"Lester Zick" <lesterDELzick@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:3fe07f0e.59170255@netnews.att.net...
Quote:
Environmental Contingencies
I believe that in the view of behaviorism, behavior is caused by or
determined by environmental contingencies or circumstances. And what I
would like to know is what the mechanics are between environmental
contingencies that cause or determine behavior?
snip..
Environment is one of the Ten Directors that control behavior of an
intelligent system. The other nine are Name, Authors, Purpose, Language,
Configuration, Operation, Owners, Market, and Value.
Enjoy!
Dave... |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Wolf Kirchmeir |
| Posted: Thu Dec 18, 2003 8:53 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 08:00:10 -0800, Dave Ulmer wrote:
Quote: I know that there are at least 10 but maybe more, I'm still looking for
more. These Ten Directors are the exact number of knowledge contexts
required for life to exist. Some billions of years ago DNA stumbled on these
ten contexts required to store a template of a lifeform and begin operating
living intelligent systems.
How do you know?
--
Wolf Kirchmeir, Blind River ON Canada
"Nature does not deal in rewards or punishments, but only in consequences."
(Robert Ingersoll) |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Rick Craik |
| Posted: Thu Dec 18, 2003 9:51 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"Dave Ulmer" <evadremlu@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:brq1qs$6bs3h$1@ID-186663.news.uni-berlin.de...
Quote:
"Lester Zick" <lesterDELzick@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:3fe07f0e.59170255@netnews.att.net...
Environmental Contingencies
I believe that in the view of behaviorism, behavior is caused by or
determined by environmental contingencies or circumstances. And what I
would like to know is what the mechanics are between environmental
contingencies that cause or determine behavior?
snip..
Environment is one of the Ten Directors that control behavior of an
intelligent system. The other nine are Name, Authors, Purpose, Language,
Configuration, Operation, Owners, Market, and Value.
I will accept your "Ten Directors", if you could explain to me why
nine directors would probably not be sufficient. I am of the view
that a system may come up with it's own number of directors, via
evolution. On the other hand, if we understand how behavior is
controlled by directors, we could design a system with a more or
less number of directors depending upon capacity requirements.
I understand that if you reply, you would likely snip the rest of
this reply, it only serves to explain the reasoning behind my
concern for the number of directors.
In general, I am not too interested in your naming conventions,
like "Name, Authors, Purpose, ...". For example, I would work
with eight bits like "0000 0000" or "0110 1110", and explain the
"Meaning of Bits" (MoBs). So then "0000 0000" would have no
meaning to the system, and likewise "1111 1111" would
have no real useful meaning. Toggling only one bit
would change the meaning, in the sense that one bit
categorically divides the rest of the meanings. That
one bit indicates that there is a difference involved
in every meaning.
To illustrate, let's say we are designing a simple environment
for an agent. Let's say that the environment is mostly about
interaction with land and not so much about water. If we restrict
the length of the MoBs to eight, then most "water meanings" will
be in terms of "land meanings". With some thought, it would be
seen that to have only one bit assigned to land/water is not
efficient. It would take more then a few bits to direct any
"water meanings"; water is drastically different from our
predominate land environment.
In summary, environmental contingencies would have
to "funnel through" the capacity of the MoBs (Meaning
of Bits). It would not matter what the actual meanings
(significance or causes, a matter for learning) were,
only that all meanings are related within some capacity.
So the question to you is: Why "Ten Directors", and not nine?
Regards,
Rick |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Lester Zick |
| Posted: Thu Dec 18, 2003 10:47 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Wed, 17 Dec 2003 08:55:52 -0800, "Dave Ulmer" <evadremlu@yahoo.com>
in sci.cognitive wrote:
Quote:
"Lester Zick" <lesterDELzick@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:3fe07f0e.59170255@netnews.att.net...
Environmental Contingencies
I believe that in the view of behaviorism, behavior is caused by or
determined by environmental contingencies or circumstances. And what I
would like to know is what the mechanics are between environmental
contingencies that cause or determine behavior?
snip..
Environment is one of the Ten Directors that control behavior of an
intelligent system. The other nine are Name, Authors, Purpose, Language,
Configuration, Operation, Owners, Market, and Value.
Enjoy!
Dave...
Thanks. I appreciate the information. It starts to sound like
behaviorism represents the original twelve step program.
Regards - Lester |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Lester Zick |
| Posted: Thu Dec 18, 2003 10:49 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 09:51:59 -0500, "Rick Craik"
<rick@@icebergideas..com> in sci.cognitive wrote:
Quote:
"Dave Ulmer" <evadremlu@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:brq1qs$6bs3h$1@ID-186663.news.uni-berlin.de...
"Lester Zick" <lesterDELzick@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:3fe07f0e.59170255@netnews.att.net...
Environmental Contingencies
I believe that in the view of behaviorism, behavior is caused by or
determined by environmental contingencies or circumstances. And what I
would like to know is what the mechanics are between environmental
contingencies that cause or determine behavior?
snip..
Environment is one of the Ten Directors that control behavior of an
intelligent system. The other nine are Name, Authors, Purpose, Language,
Configuration, Operation, Owners, Market, and Value.
I will accept your "Ten Directors", if you could explain to me why
nine directors would probably not be sufficient. I am of the view
that a system may come up with it's own number of directors, via
evolution. On the other hand, if we understand how behavior is
controlled by directors, we could design a system with a more or
less number of directors depending upon capacity requirements.
I understand that if you reply, you would likely snip the rest of
this reply, it only serves to explain the reasoning behind my
concern for the number of directors.
In general, I am not too interested in your naming conventions,
like "Name, Authors, Purpose, ...". For example, I would work
with eight bits like "0000 0000" or "0110 1110", and explain the
"Meaning of Bits" (MoBs). So then "0000 0000" would have no
meaning to the system, and likewise "1111 1111" would
have no real useful meaning. Toggling only one bit
would change the meaning, in the sense that one bit
categorically divides the rest of the meanings. That
one bit indicates that there is a difference involved
in every meaning.
To illustrate, let's say we are designing a simple environment
for an agent. Let's say that the environment is mostly about
interaction with land and not so much about water. If we restrict
the length of the MoBs to eight, then most "water meanings" will
be in terms of "land meanings". With some thought, it would be
seen that to have only one bit assigned to land/water is not
efficient. It would take more then a few bits to direct any
"water meanings"; water is drastically different from our
predominate land environment.
In summary, environmental contingencies would have
to "funnel through" the capacity of the MoBs (Meaning
of Bits). It would not matter what the actual meanings
(significance or causes, a matter for learning) were,
only that all meanings are related within some capacity.
So the question to you is: Why "Ten Directors", and not nine?
Regards,
Rick
Or why not eleven or twelve or more?
Regards - Lester |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Dave Ulmer |
| Posted: Thu Dec 18, 2003 11:00 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"Rick Craik" <rick@@icebergideas..com> wrote in message
news:pojEb.112$X04.8175@news20.bellglobal.com...
Quote:
"Dave Ulmer" <evadremlu@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:brq1qs$6bs3h$1@ID-186663.news.uni-berlin.de...
"Lester Zick" <lesterDELzick@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:3fe07f0e.59170255@netnews.att.net...
Environmental Contingencies
I believe that in the view of behaviorism, behavior is caused by or
determined by environmental contingencies or circumstances. And what I
would like to know is what the mechanics are between environmental
contingencies that cause or determine behavior?
snip..
Environment is one of the Ten Directors that control behavior of an
intelligent system. The other nine are Name, Authors, Purpose, Language,
Configuration, Operation, Owners, Market, and Value.
I will accept your "Ten Directors", if you could explain to me why
nine directors would probably not be sufficient. I am of the view
that a system may come up with it's own number of directors, via
evolution. On the other hand, if we understand how behavior is
controlled by directors, we could design a system with a more or
less number of directors depending upon capacity requirements.
I know that there are at least 10 but maybe more, I'm still looking for
more. These Ten Directors are the exact number of knowledge contexts
required for life to exist. Some billions of years ago DNA stumbled on these
ten contexts required to store a template of a lifeform and begin operating
living intelligent systems.
Quote:
I understand that if you reply, you would likely snip the rest of
this reply, it only serves to explain the reasoning behind my
concern for the number of directors.
In general, I am not too interested in your naming conventions,
like "Name, Authors, Purpose, ...". For example, I would work
with eight bits like "0000 0000" or "0110 1110", and explain the
"Meaning of Bits" (MoBs). So then "0000 0000" would have no
meaning to the system, and likewise "1111 1111" would
have no real useful meaning. Toggling only one bit
would change the meaning, in the sense that one bit
categorically divides the rest of the meanings. That
one bit indicates that there is a difference involved
in every meaning.
Names are very important to living systems. All intelligent systems must
know thier Kind by Name so that a bacteria can be differentiated from an
aoemeba. The knowledge of Names is stored in the context of the Name
Director.
Quote:
To illustrate, let's say we are designing a simple environment
for an agent. Let's say that the environment is mostly about
interaction with land and not so much about water. If we restrict
the length of the MoBs to eight, then most "water meanings" will
be in terms of "land meanings". With some thought, it would be
seen that to have only one bit assigned to land/water is not
efficient. It would take more then a few bits to direct any
"water meanings"; water is drastically different from our
predominate land environment.
In summary, environmental contingencies would have
to "funnel through" the capacity of the MoBs (Meaning
of Bits). It would not matter what the actual meanings
(significance or causes, a matter for learning) were,
only that all meanings are related within some capacity.
Your MoBs are covered in the context of the Language Director which
interprets bits and DNA codes and stores them as knowledge in the approprate
context director.
Quote:
So the question to you is: Why "Ten Directors", and not nine?
I'm still looking for number 11.
Dave... |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Dave Ulmer |
| Posted: Thu Dec 18, 2003 11:54 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"Lester Zick" <lesterDELzick@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:3fe1cc45.70235449@netnews.att.net...
Quote: On Wed, 17 Dec 2003 08:55:52 -0800, "Dave Ulmer" <evadremlu@yahoo.com
in sci.cognitive wrote:
"Lester Zick" <lesterDELzick@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:3fe07f0e.59170255@netnews.att.net...
Environmental Contingencies
I believe that in the view of behaviorism, behavior is caused by or
determined by environmental contingencies or circumstances. And what I
would like to know is what the mechanics are between environmental
contingencies that cause or determine behavior?
snip..
Environment is one of the Ten Directors that control behavior of an
intelligent system. The other nine are Name, Authors, Purpose, Language,
Configuration, Operation, Owners, Market, and Value.
Enjoy!
Dave...
Thanks. I appreciate the information. It starts to sound like
behaviorism represents the original twelve step program.
The Ten Directors are the magic of life, without the proper contexts
knowledge is useless. But, what it really shows it that life is like a
business and business is a life.
Dave...
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Rick Craik |
| Posted: Thu Dec 18, 2003 1:43 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"Lester Zick" <lesterDELzick@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:3fe1ccd8.70382424@netnews.att.net...
Quote: On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 09:51:59 -0500, "Rick Craik"
rick@@icebergideas..com> in sci.cognitive wrote:
[snip]
In summary, environmental contingencies would have
to "funnel through" the capacity of the MoBs (Meaning
of Bits). It would not matter what the actual meanings
(significance or causes, a matter for learning) were,
only that all meanings are related within some capacity.
So the question to you [Dave] is:
Why "Ten Directors", and not nine?
Or why not eleven or twelve or more?
Yes.
Dave subsequently replied; "I'm still looking for number 11."
He did not care to address the pointed question.
Regards,
Rick |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Lester Zick |
| Posted: Thu Dec 18, 2003 2:22 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 13:53:58 -0500 (EST), "Wolf Kirchmeir"
<wwolfkir@sympatico.can> in comp.ai.philosophy wrote:
Quote: On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 08:00:10 -0800, Dave Ulmer wrote:
I know that there are at least 10 but maybe more, I'm still looking for
more. These Ten Directors are the exact number of knowledge contexts
required for life to exist. Some billions of years ago DNA stumbled on these
ten contexts required to store a template of a lifeform and begin operating
living intelligent systems.
How do you know?
Exactly. And if there is some basis for knowing these ten directors
there must be some explainable relation between and among them.
Regards - Lester |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Dave Ulmer |
| Posted: Thu Dec 18, 2003 3:20 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"Wolf Kirchmeir" <wwolfkir@sympatico.can> wrote in message
news:jbysxveflzcngvpbpna.hq3tty2.pminews@news1.sympatico.ca...
Quote: On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 08:00:10 -0800, Dave Ulmer wrote:
I know that there are at least 10 but maybe more, I'm still looking for
more. These Ten Directors are the exact number of knowledge contexts
required for life to exist. Some billions of years ago DNA stumbled on
these
ten contexts required to store a template of a lifeform and begin
operating
living intelligent systems.
How do you know?
20 years of careful study and testing and re-testing...
If you look carefully at the list: Name, Authors, Purpose, Environment,
Language, Configuration, Operation, Owners, Market, and Value; you will see
their affects in every corner of life. These Ten Directors direct you me and
every living thing. But, to truly understand how they work you must know the
difference between knowledge and understanding. The Ten Directors are pure
knowledge bases and the procedural knowledge that drives your understanding
engines is stored in the Operation Director.
Then of course it would be nice if you knew the different types of
knowledge...
Dave... |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Dave Ulmer |
| Posted: Thu Dec 18, 2003 3:29 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"Lester Zick" <lesterDELzick@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:3fe1fe46.72529326@netnews.att.net...
Quote: On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 13:53:58 -0500 (EST), "Wolf Kirchmeir"
wwolfkir@sympatico.can> in comp.ai.philosophy wrote:
On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 08:00:10 -0800, Dave Ulmer wrote:
I know that there are at least 10 but maybe more, I'm still looking for
more. These Ten Directors are the exact number of knowledge contexts
required for life to exist. Some billions of years ago DNA stumbled on
these
ten contexts required to store a template of a lifeform and begin
operating
living intelligent systems.
How do you know?
Exactly. And if there is some basis for knowing these ten directors
there must be some explainable relation between and among them.
The reason that the Ten Directors are different contexts is that there is
specifically NO direct relationship between them. If there were a
relationship you wouldn't need Ten. Now when you add understanding to the
system through procedural knowledge stored in the Operation Director those
procedures can draw relationships between director knowledge. If your father
(Author) was Joe Kennedy (Name) then your name Kennedy would have been born
with a certain (Value) due to your inheritance which is an understanding.
Dave... |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Wolf Kirchmeir |
| Posted: Thu Dec 18, 2003 5:14 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 12:20:54 -0800, Dave Ulmer wrote:
Quote: 20 years of careful study and testing and re-testing...
References to publications in refereed journals, please.
--
Wolf Kirchmeir, Blind River ON Canada
"Nature does not deal in rewards or punishments, but only in consequences."
(Robert Ingersoll) |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Wolf Kirchmeir |
| Posted: Fri Dec 19, 2003 4:38 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Fri, 19 Dec 2003 05:13:43 -0800, Dave Ulmer wrote:
Quote: The other problem is a resistance to anything that comes close to explaining
the 'secret of life' which most scientists apparently consider impossible to
understand.
Well, sorry, Dave, but the "secret of life" is subject to scientific
scrutiny, and in its general outlines is pretty well understood. Not but that
there aren't surprises, as for example the recent realisation that junk DNA
does have a various functions in the control of genes, and hence influences
and in some ways even determines inheritance. Etc.
--
Wolf Kirchmeir, Blind River ON Canada
"Nature does not deal in rewards or punishments, but only in consequences."
(Robert Ingersoll) |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Eray Ozkural exa |
| Posted: Fri Dec 19, 2003 4:45 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"Wolf Kirchmeir" <wwolfkir@sympatico.can> wrote in message news:<jbysxveflzcngvpbpna.hq4h0a1.pminews@news1.sympatico.ca>...
Quote: On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 12:20:54 -0800, Dave Ulmer wrote:
20 years of careful study and testing and re-testing...
References to publications in refereed journals, please.
Well said Wolf :)
I think cogsci crackpots hold the crown of crackpottery. "Ten
Directors". Oh my god.... |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
Page 1 of 2 Goto page 1, 2 Next
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
The time now is Fri Sep 05, 2008 4:23 pm
|
|