Marty,
Even when they can parrot back to us what you say below, if you stick them
with a pin they may say something like: "Radical behaviorism is the
behaviorism that most people _instinctively_ think of when the term is
mentioned." The young man who wrote that on a test last week went on to
right himself and clearly distinguish between radical and cognitive
behaviorisms for several pages, but I'm guessing he has heard so many sports
announcers talk about ball players' instincts that the term "instinctive"
is way up there in his habit family hierarchy.
Al
Al L. Cone
Jamestown College <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
North Dakota 701.252.3467 X 2604
http://www.jc.edu/users/faculty/cone
The Internet is democracy at its ugliest. Apologies to Paddy Chayefsky who
said this about television
-----Original Message-----
From: Martin J. Bourgeois [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, April 25, 2000 10:19 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Affective aspects of teaching (fwd)
All right Rick! I was about to send off a tirade against the simplistic
notion that mental processes are a result of brain processes, but your
message said it much more eloquently. Do the rest of you have a hard time
convincing students that brain-mind-behavioral processes are not one way
(i.e., that brain states do not cause thinking and behaving)?
Marty Bourgeois
University of Wyoming
-----Original Message-----
From: Rick Froman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, April 25, 2000 7:35 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Affective aspects of teaching (fwd)
On Mon, 24 Apr 2000, Louis_Schmier wrote:
> Hey, Tipsters, thought you might find the statement made on the
> Professional Development discussion list where we talk about faculty
> development. I thought it an interesting assertion that to me
> implies your discipline is archaic. Wondering how you would
> respond--nicely. Sounds brain-baseish to me. Of course, what isn't.
> Need your help.
>
> Subject: Affective aspects of teaching
>
> .......The statement that learning is a psychological process is
> certainly not new, but it has never gotten us very far. What's
> coming to light in current research in cognition is that learning is
> really a biological process. [See J. Changeux, Neuronal Man, G.
> Edelman, The Remembered Present, A. Gopnik et al, The Scientist in
> the Crib, R. Restak, The Modular Brain, K Klivington, The Science of
> Mind.] Even the affective elements Raoul speaks of (and are
> absolutely and critically important) are the result of brain states,
> the limbic system, its connection to the frontal lobes and the
> "attention focusing/distraction avoiding" regulation of the frontal
> cortex.....
My response is in the form of a statement from the Computer Geek
mailing list that follows:
.......The statement that computer processing is a software
process is certainly not new, but it has never gotten us very far.
What's coming to light in current research in computer processing
is that computation is really a hardware process. . . . Even the
programming elements B. Gates speaks of (which are absolutely
and critically important) are the result of hardware states, the hard
drive, the location of certain substances on magnetic media and
the controlling functions of the CPU . . . .
Rick
Dr. Rick Froman
Psychology Department
Box 3055
John Brown University
Siloam Springs, AR 72761
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.jbu.edu/sbs/psych
Office: (501)524-7295
Fax: (501)524-9548
