Re: Finding useful functions- part 1
From: AlphaOmega2004 (OmegaZero2003_at_yahoo.com)
Date: 10/26/04
- Next message: AlphaOmega2004: "Re: Finding useful functions- part 1"
- Previous message: Stargazer: "Re: Finding useful functions- part 1"
- In reply to: David Longley: "Re: Finding useful functions- part 1"
- Next in thread: AlphaOmega2004: "Re: Finding useful functions- part 1"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2004 08:28:09 -0700
"David Longley" <David@longley.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:Crq7l5GSSSfBFwls@longley.demon.co.uk...
> In article <WvCdnUKMSp9pluDcRVn-iQ@metrocastcablevision.com>, Bill Modlin
> <modlin1@metrocast.net> writes
>>
>>"Glen M. Sizemore" <gmsizemore2@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>news:20041025074544.269$G8@news.newsreader.com...
>>> What is important in sensation and perception is that movement of
>>an animal
>>> (or, more specifically, of its receptors) has consequences. When
>>we sweep
>>> our eyes over a patch of red, there are changes in stimulation -
>>such
>>> movement/consequence contingencies are at the heart of learning to
>>perceive
>>> the world.
>>
>>As I said at the end of my note, such consequence-driven learning
>>cannot be ignored. But it is not the only important kind of
>>learning, nor is it in any sense the "most" important.
>
> Nonsense.
>
> How do you know this? Why do you talk this way at all? What makes you
> think there are different types of "learning" (leaving aside the dubious
> distinction between operant and classical conditioning)? What is an
> *important* kind of learning? The previous four questions are more helpful
> than you might think.
Nonsense!
>
> If you had read Catania's book as I advised you might not be writing this
> way (hence the four questions - although you probably thought them just
> expressing critical indignation at your gall <g> I assume therefore that
> you have not read his book, and so I ask you: what do you know about
> "learning" and how do you know it?
>
> Until you address that, how do you know whether what you are writing makes
> any more sense than the stuff Zick or Verhey write? Might it be that you
> just write more eloquently?
> --
> David Longley
- Next message: AlphaOmega2004: "Re: Finding useful functions- part 1"
- Previous message: Stargazer: "Re: Finding useful functions- part 1"
- In reply to: David Longley: "Re: Finding useful functions- part 1"
- Next in thread: AlphaOmega2004: "Re: Finding useful functions- part 1"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
|