1. Because all, who taste it, prefer brain stimulation to any
The experiment with the robo-rat would be impossible, if it were
3 / 4 Do you want to say that there is not novelty in my idea?
I.e. that it all can be founded in the works of behaviouralists. Must
"Glen M. Sizemore" <gmsizemore2 at yahoo.com> wrote in message news:<7ba8f70446a40db3535a188b98286792 at news.teranews.com>...
> 1.) Why use brain stimulation rather than more conventional reinforcers? 2.)
> Both positive and negative reinforcement have played a large role in the
> "development" of most human beings. 3.) You do know that there is a large
> literature on the "Law of Effect" discovered by Thorndike (of course,
> "hedonism" was a philosophical precursor) and widely investigated by the
> scientific field (founded by BF Skinner; the "experimental analysis of
> behavior" or "behavior analysis," nowadays), right? 4.) There is a
> successful behavioral technology based on the principles discovered in the
> basic laboratory (which uses both humans and non-humans) called "Applied
> Behavior Analysis." For some of the basic research from about '56 or '57 on
> see "The Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior." Much applied
> work can be found in the "Journal of the Applied Analysis of Behavior"
> founded, I think, in the '70s.
>> "Oleg" <ingenuous at mail.ru> wrote in message
> news:3fe91fdd.0401210017.79051f18 at posting.google.com...> > Addition
> > To transmit information we can use the combinations of reinforcements:
> > 1) right result -> neutral reinforcement, wrong result -> negative
> > one;
> > 2) right result -> positive reinforcement, wrong result -> negative
> > one;
> > 3) right result -> positive reinforcement, wrong result -> neutral
> > one.
> > Mankind development is based mostly on negative reinforcements (the
> > struggle for survival) that conduce to creativeness. Excessive
> > positive reinforcements can bring along egotistical beings.
> > Oleg M. Goryunov