Newsgroups: comp.ai,sci.philosophy.tech,sci.logic,comp.ai.philosophy,sci.cognitive
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!news4.ner.bbnplanet.net!news3.near.net!news2.near.net!howland.reston.ans.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!btnet!uunet!in1.uu.net!ncrgw2.ncr.com!ncrhub6!daynews!intruder!news
From: David E. Weldon, Ph.D. <David.E.Weldon@DaytonOH.ATTGIS.COM>
Subject: Re: 1. FOL and 2. Longley's insidious programme
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: 149.25.61.42
Message-ID: <DCKA42.7rL@intruder.daytonoh.attgis.com>
Sender: news@intruder.daytonoh.attgis.com (News administrative Login)
Reply-To: David.E.Weldon@DaytonOH.ATTGIS.COM (WELDOD)
Organization: AT&T Global Info Solutions
X-Newsreader: DiscussIT 2.0.1.2 for MS Windows [AT&T Software Products Division]
References: <806836484snz@longley.demon.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 1995 03:38:26 GMT
Lines: 75
Xref: glinda.oz.cs.cmu.edu comp.ai:32021 sci.philosophy.tech:19100 sci.logic:13325 comp.ai.philosophy:31102 sci.cognitive:8708


}==========David Longley, 7/27/95==========
}
}In article <95Jul27.034754edt.6061@neat.cs.toronto.edu>
}           cbo@cs.toronto.edu "Calvin Bruce Ostrum" writes:
}> " 
}> " Why don't you tell us what your vision for a world is, that 
}requires
}> " your method of "applied psychology"?  That requires us to 
}give up
}> " the idea that people have beliefs, desires, intentions, and 
}things
}> " that matter to them, and care about freedom and dignity.  Just 
}tell us.
}> " Forget the little bit about predicting when prison inmates are 
}going
}> " to get too uppity for their warden's comfort and safety, and 
}give us
}> " the bigger picture that justifies your whole attitude.
}> 
}As  I have said before, I have nothing so grand. I have gone   to  
}great  lengths to show the basic problem of  intensional   idioms  
}though,  see 'On What Is Said....'.
}
}Secondly,  the  aspect  of the work I am concerned  with  is  not  
}primarily  motivated by control, although that inevitably has  to 
}be  respected. It is more appropriately conceived as a  
}framework 
}for  *managing* rehabilitation through identifying  &  developing 
}individuals' strengths.  
}
}This is *explicitly* spelled out in extract 9 (article 5) of  the 
}series.    The  whole  system  is  essentially   an   intelligent 
}assessment, evaluation & report writing system.
}
}I  don't think your remarks on my representation of  Nisbett  are 
}accurate.   I quoted him at length to show that the matter  is  a 
}subtle one, and that *you* have misunderstood the nature  of  the 
}research. Anyone  interested can of course now read the  
}material  
}at  first  hand, which is  the  whole point of this  strategy  of 
}extensive quotation.
}
}If   you   don't want to take *me* seriously, that's  fine.  Just 
}read  the  extracts  and  see what picture  they  make  when  put 
}together.  
}-- 
}David Longley
}
I think it would be helpful to this thread to remind ourselves of those areas
where behaviour modification appears to work the best.  These are (the order
is not necessarily relevant):
1.  Animals in a skinner apparatus (with body weight maintained at 80%).
2.  Undergraduate Psychology students interested in gaining a few extra points
towards a final grade.
3.  Children in a large variety of situations, all of which involve the
presence of an adult who controls distribution of the reinforcers.
4.  Patients with phobias who have agreed to a social contract with a
therapist who again has complete control of the environment.
5.  Weight Loss/Smoking therapies where the patient signs an explicit social
contract with the therapist.

There are probably more, but the above should tell us a great deal about the
efficacy of behaviour modification when the subject of that modification has
no desire to conform to the expectations or social contracts of a prison
psychologist, or, more likely, has a totally different view of the interaction
and what can be gained from it.

Lest you fail to see the point, or the relevance of the "animal research,"
just think about what it means to be maintained at 80 percent of body weight. 
For a 150 lb. adult, this means being forced to stay at 120 lbs.  This is not
starvation, but it is definitely on the edge (I weigh 200lbs and have been at
160lbs during an illness--believe me, a person in that state is emaciated and
when appitite returns, is ravenous.

