Not yet a member? No problem!
Sign-up just takes a second.
Forgot your password?
Recover it now.
Already signed up?
Log in now.
Forgot your password?
Recover it now.
Not yet a member? No problem!
Sign-up just takes a second.
Remember your password?
Log in now.
10 Comments
Zonbiesays...Zzzz.Zzzz..."That was easy."...Bang...."Fuck."..."Zzzz"
siftbotsays...This video has been flagged as being Not Suitable For Work - declared nsfw by Zonbie.
rougysays...Unfortunately, behavioral psychology has become a hellofa lot more sophisticated than simple shocks, over the years.
1stSingularitysays...I hope that kid gets an A!
Trancecoachsays...Too bad Pavlov's theory of classical conditioning is philosophically unsound.
antsays...Dang, I should had tried this back in the mid 1990s/90s.
Unsung_Herosays...Hmmm 2 points to make here...
# 1. What a terrible freaking roommate!
# 2. Why the hell did it take so long for him to associate the sound to "I'm about to get pelted and hurt is on the way"
NetRunnersays...>> ^Trancecoach:
Too bad Pavlov's theory of classical conditioning is philosophically unsound.
I think the behavioralist response to that is that there's a lot of evidence that we're simpler machines than we think we are, and that much of our conceptions about our motivations and thought processes are post-hoc justifications of what we did without conscious thought.
I definitely prefer the way philosophers approach human action, but I've got this gnawing doubt that they simply assume we're far more rational than we really are. After all, if we were rational, simple questions like "what is right and what is wrong" wouldn't be so hard to answer.
Trancecoachsays...Read the link I posted.
Better yet, read the book the link is referring to.
>> ^NetRunner:
>> ^Trancecoach:
Too bad Pavlov's theory of classical conditioning is philosophically unsound.
I think the behavioralist response to that is that there's a lot of evidence that we're simpler machines than we think we are, and that much of our conceptions about our motivations and thought processes are post-hoc justifications of what we did without conscious thought.
I definitely prefer the way philosophers approach human action, but I've got this gnawing doubt that they simply assume we're far more rational than we really are. After all, if we were rational, simple questions like "what is right and what is wrong" wouldn't be so hard to answer.
NetRunnersays...>> ^Trancecoach:
Read the link I posted.
Better yet, read the book the link is referring to.
I'll add it to my list.
Discuss...
Enable JavaScript to submit a comment.