I have only read parts of this thread.
Very busy these days. I have not read E.Becker but I will.

This classic Buddhist gatha was brought to my attention recently. I think it could fit in here.

quote:

All formations are impermanent.
They are subject to birth and death.
But remove the notions of birth and death,
and this silence is called great joy.

"All formations are impermanent. They are subject to birth and death"
This skillful author is describing reality as we usually see it.
Conventional "truth". Impermanence implies or confirms it's opposite, permanence exists.
It's tempting to consider the first two lines true.
Formations and impermanence are ideas.
The same applies to conventional/absolute truth.

quote:

All formations are impermanent.
They are subject to birth and death.
But remove the notions of birth and death,
and this silence is called great joy.

That's very nice! Well put!

... I have been meaning to get back to this thread for some time now... Hehehe, unfortunately, this isn't the time...

I have been training a herd of horses recently on a ranch in Philomath, Oregon. It's amazing how much I am learning about "self-preservation salience" (maybe thats a better, more all encompassing technical term?) in both me and horses. In sum, horses have none, humans are full of it - particularily, those people whose sense of meaning revolves all around horses. One exception it seems is the horse sage, Bill Dorrance. I'm reading his lifetime wisdom on horse training in the book "True Horsemanship Through Feel". He died in 2003 at age 92.

In the book there are concepts that he tries to relate but cannot quite put into words. It is written in his genuine vernacular, so you really get a flavor of the man. You would think that this would irritate, but for me I can sense he is simply trying to convey an art for which he has not any schooling....its all self taught through direct experience over a lifetime. Hence the book is almost zen-like.

There are eerie references to the "vitality and drive towards life" in the book. How horses just want to get along and trust in a leader. He is unwittingly very profound and philosophical without knowing it.

I've come to realize that several things about the difference between nonsymbolic animals and us. If an animal grows and specializes in a symbolic environment, has some capability of using symbols, and it has social conditions imposed on it, it MUST also seek meaning, a sense of primary worth and significance.

A horse in a herd also has social conditions imposed upon its growth, but the environment is not symbolic. Thus, a horse will not search for meaning but it will adapt its behavior to create the most harmony in the herd. Thus, although there is conflict and testing of its place in the herd, the tests are simple and direct and uncomplicated.

The cacophony of conflicting symbols and varying individual sensitivities to these symbols creates all the apparent complexities in human relationships.

In fact, if we ever find life on other planets whose "intelligence and spirituality" is put into question, the criteria to ascertain its level social evolution could well be "does it use symbols in its interactions"

quote:

Originally posted by janek:
I have been training a herd of horses recently on a ranch in Philomath, Oregon.

… Long way from New York…

… Interesting observations you make. I seem to remember one of a number of documentaries, a few years back about the fine art of ‘horse whispering,’ that soon followed Robert Redford’s very popular movie of a similar name. I was intrigued by one of these documentaries in particular, because of the older, wiser, and fascinating character this one was based upon. I’m not sure if it was the same individual that you speak of, but it sure sounds like it to me… I have always looked to ‘the Artists Way’ (Thank you Julia Cameron), the nature of consciousness (Thank you Seth), the nature of beliefs (Thank you Science and Religion), and almost any other of life’s more unconventional approaches to life’s non-objective experiences, as a primary focus to my own personal observations and journey… Your post seems to run the entire gamut of all that I find salient -as well as sacred…

quote:

Janek:
There are eerie references to the "vitality and drive towards life" in the book. How horses just want to get along and trust in a leader. He is unwittingly very profound and philosophical without knowing it

… I have an old favorite book I discovered, many years ago, on the .99 cent table at Coliseum Books in New York City. It was titled “The Nine American Lifestyles,” and it was a Stanford Research Institute demographic breakdown of what the authors had determined –through extensive research- to be a fairly accurate ‘ennegramic’ type breakdown of the collective American consumer. The book is still used extensively in many marketing and advertising circles today. The book talked about ‘Survivors and Sustainers –Experiential and Societally Conscious –Emulators and Achievers, and a few others. In addition to a wealth of information it provided with each descriptive category, It also provided a numerical breakdown as to how much each particular group numbered -percentage wise- with reference to the U.S. adult population. As an example, ‘Sustainers’ were said to amount to ‘seven percent’ of the U.S. adult population, while ‘Emulators’ were said to amount to ‘nine percent’ of the U.S. adult population. The second highest group were what the researchers referred to as the ‘Achievers,’ and they were said to comprise twenty two percent of the U.S. adult population… The highest percentage of all the categories covered were those whom the researchers referred to as the ‘Belongers’ –and they were said to comprise thirty five percent of the U.S. adult population… (As an interesting aside, all nine categories were also grouped into two sub-categories, and into what the researchers also referred to as both ‘Inner-directed’ member of the U.S. adult population, and the ‘Outer-directed’ members of the U.S. adult population… Not surprisingly, the overall ‘Inner-directed’ numbers were significantly much smaller than the corresponding ‘Outer-directed’ numbers of the U.S. population as a whole…)
… Your observation of a certain number of horses just simply ‘wanting to get along,’ brought back to the fore-front of my consciousness, this long since retired information regarding ‘belongers’ in the human family, and how they may even parallel similar proclivities in animals –or in this case, horses…

… Gnarly just recently provided an interesting observation with a peek into the more domesticated version of her dogs own "self-preservation salience"… It might not be the same as that of wild horses, but it is still a unique scenario regardless;

Gnarly post

quote:

Gnarly:

We have a little dog here, he was raised from a puppy and had been our only dog until about 4 months ago when we inherited a giant dog from my niece. The little dog the prime dog of the house but has come into some self doubt about his status. In his zeal to prove he is the most necessary and useful dog here, he runs across the road and barks at the neighbors, and he barks at visitors incessantly. He has even gotten rather spiteful by pooping in the wrong place whenever he feels spurned, and doing other intentionally antisocial things. Since he hasn't adapted well to sharing the house with another dog, we are wondering if he should even stay.

The dog doesn't realize that his own actions are putting his own security in jeopardy. The very thing that is most important to him, his membership in the pack, is threatened by actions caused by his own imagination. We feel bad for him but don't know how to fix it. The dog does not have enough abstract thought to understand that he is worrying himself into future loneliness.

I tell this story because so often humans do the same thing. We operate out of fear, worry and competition. Negative emotions control our actions, and the result is antisocial and isolating. When we realize that is happening, we must consciously strive to be positive, we must displace the negative with actions based on awareness and benevolence.

… Some might suggest that she could be reading a bit too much ‘humanity’ into the life of a creature that may very well share little of our own conscious associations. But what is consciousness anyway? I think it’s a great, and certainly an ‘unconventional’ observation, that provides an added bonus to the mind that so chooses to ‘stretch’ it’s own boundaries, perceptions, and beliefs, by opening up the parameters of our own self programmed associations…

… Speaking of ‘associations’ –I was just recently (two days ago) making reference to the whole idea of words themselves, and the individual and unique ‘associations’ that we all create in our own personal memory banks, as we continually ‘react to’ –and even ‘add to’- layer upon layer of word, or even ‘symbolic’ associations. Here’s a little something of what I was trying to share with Kate on a neighboring thread;

Other thread

quote:

quote:
Kate:
So, a person has to be stubborn and clear, to mow through the dross.

Lawrence:

... Interesting thing 'word associations' doncha think? Take the word 'stubborn' for instance. It probably means similar things to both of us, and yet the word itself conjures up associations in my own mind that might not be the same with your own. Although the word might suggest a certain 'stick-to-it' determination, in my association it is 'felt' or perceived to be much more of a child like -or 'childish'- quality, and not one I would personally choose in making a similar analogy... Personally, I might be more inclined to mirror your comment, and achieve the same effect 'without' the word 'stubborn'... As in;

"... So, a person has to be clear, to mow through the dross..."

... Now then, about those associations with the word 'clear'...

… As I’ve already stated, your essay seems to have run the entire gamut of many of the basic fundamentals that I, myself find so intriguing in life. Which is to say it was also most interesting to read your inclusion on the subject of ‘meaning’ to life, which also seemed to parallel my own inclusion into this very same post, while talking to Kate, regarding associations;

quote:

Kate:

Afternoon, Lawrence, and /ren-

Thanks for sharing. It's odd how human experience brings out the meaning of stuff that was just on a teacher's book list, when I first saw it.

Lawrence:

... What is it to be human, than to bring out the meaning of stuff...

... Some bring out the meaning of stuff through thinking...

... Others bring out the meaning of stuff through feeling...

... and Some Others bring out the meaning of stuff through 'theeling'...

… Hehehe, and of course one cannot also help but to notice the synchronistic references that we both seem to have made with regards to the connections to ‘feelings’…

… It should come as no surprise that when I was typing those very words, regarding ‘meaning,’ in my discussion with Kate, The ‘associations’ that popped into my head, ‘now’ included the association of Ernest Becker –and this very thread that you and I have shared these past few months- where before, these new associations would not have been present at all…

quote:

Janek:
The cacophony of conflicting symbols and varying individual sensitivities to these symbols creates all the apparent complexities in human relationships.

… This is undoubtedly quite true, yet I have to wonder, how would the ‘horse whisperer’ state this observation –or even ‘the artist,’ for that matter?…

… Perhaps ‘the artist’ has already spoken…

… Now, might be time for the ‘horse whisperer’…

… Ohhhh, wait… (s)he too has already spoken on this matter as well…

… Matter?…

… Hehehe… Now there’s an association for you, no?…


... One final observation... I hope that my friend Ren notices this thread of ours. I think he would find your latest observations both insightful and scholarly... and creatively... 'unconventional'...

Morning, Lawrence-

I had missed this thread and janek's contributions. Thanks for bringing it out. Looks like there's a fair bit of reading.

Kate

quote:

Originally posted by --Kate:
Morning, Lawrence-

I had missed this thread and janek's contributions. Thanks for bringing it out. Looks like there's a fair bit of reading.

Kate

... Well, I'm glad to see your Presence... You should be here, as you have already noticed, you are now an integral part of this thread... You will not be disappointed though. Janek (or is that Jan eck?) has a very special eye for the sublime...

quote:

your Presence...

In the matter of all due course ...

The National Geographic Channel has a show called "The Dog whisperer" His name is Cesar Milan and he "trains people and rehabilitates dogs" Anytime there is a dog problem he attributes it to the owner as relating to the dog as a human rather than a dog.
Dogs are pack animals. So having more than one, to teach them social skills requires "walking" according to Cesar Milan. You walk them both on a short leash and when either of them is not concentrating on the walk he gives a tug on the leash with a "Shsht" sound which immediately returns the dog's focus on the walk rather than the other dog or people that pass by. Milan claims that "the walk" is where dogs learn social skills. The dog never walks ahead of the packleader, but walks beside him/her. The HUMAN is the pack leader. So when we get exited becausse the dog runs accross the street and scream, we represent an unstable human and increase the instability of the dogm, according to Milan. Milan insists that owners must ALWAYS be calm and assertive, while their dogs must be calm and submissive. His shows provides a wealth of information. I watch them religiously and have them taped. Dogs live in the moment so whatever happen yesterday or last year is irrelevant to them today. Anyone with dog issues I would suggest try to get the National Geographic Channel and watch the Dog Whisperer. You'll be glad you did.

quote:

Anyone with dog issues I would suggest try to get the National Geographic Channel and watch the Dog Whisperer. You'll be glad you did.

Interesting. Thanks for the tip, Gerry.

quote:

Anytime there is a dog problem he attributes it to the owner as relating to the dog as a human rather than a dog.

Woof!

(well trained owner of two fabulous dogs.)

quote:

The National Geographic Channel has a show called "The Dog whisperer" His name is Cesar Milan and he "trains people and rehabilitates dogs"

My dogs love that guy. Especially Sammy, my golden retriever. He'll sit through the whole show, never taking his eyes off the TV. At the end of the program when the lessons are over he sits up, starts wagging his tail and whines

The training of animals does have philosophical and moral implications. As Gerry has noted it takes empathy of the ANIMAL'S situation to properly use Skinnerian conditioning.

If one cannot vividly imagine being in the animals situation, within its particular species rule-book, one cannot provide the appropriate kind of reinforcment and punishment to modify behavior. You could say that animal whisperers are expert at using the negative sense of the Golden Rule - Do not do on to others as you would not be done to you.

Just to remind myself (and correct me if I'm less than accurate) there are three types of behavior modification techniques:

Positive reinforcement is an increase in behavior that results when a pleasurable stimulus is provided when a specific behavior is exhibited.

Punishment is a decrease in behavior as result of an aversive stimulus provided when a specific behavior is exhibited.

Negative reinforcement is an increase in behavior that results when the context that restrains or places the organism in discomfort is removed.

It is negative reinforcement that is the source of the dog and horse whisperers ability to gain the trust of the animal. A society provides the all-encompassing conditional environment that acts as the restraint on that species natural individual impulses (apply that statment to us).

A horse's or dog's society is characterized by a constant testing of status in the herd or pack. An individual's drive is to test how far it can go up the ladder. These animals come to comfortable closure by constant pressuring and by use of body language and actual fighting. It is through negative reinforcement that horse or dog earns his place in the group. This place is where the animal is comfortable to be.

Ironically, the horse or dog searches for a place of FREEDOM from restraint and conflict within the context of its new rule-bound status. It does want to trust a leader or to be the leader - of that is its destiny.

quote:

Just to remind myself (and correct me if I'm less than accurate) there are three types of behavior modification techniques:

Positive reinforcement is an increase in behavior that results when a pleasurable stimulus is provided when a specific behavior is exhibited.

Punishment is a decrease in behavior as result of an aversive stimulus provided when a specific behavior is exhibited.

Negative reinforcement is an increase in behavior that results when the context that restrains or places the organism in discomfort is removed.

It is negative reinforcement that is the source of the dog and horse whisperers ability to gain the trust of the animal. A society provides the all-encompassing conditional environment that acts as the restraint on that species natural individual impulses (apply that statment to us).

Hi Janek-

You have provided an addition to my 'books to read list', "True Horsemanship Through Feel" Bill Dorrance.

This is the part I have trouble with accepting or understanding.

quote:

It is negative reinforcement that is the source of the dog and horse whisperers ability to gain the trust of the animal.

In your opinion, is it probable that that Bill Dorrance is attempting to express something beyond the realm of psychology? Perhaps a realm that most "civilized" humans have long forgotten as a result of 'negative reinforcement' a language spoken by nature by animals. A language older than words?

quote:

no people understands any more the sensual language, and the birds in the air and the beasts in the forest do understand it according to their species. Therfore man may reflect what he has been robbed of, and what he is to recover in the second birth. For in the sensual language all spirits speak with each other, they need no other language, for it is language of nature

Jacob Boehme

I'm not much of a Christian believer but this guy (a German Christian Mystic from the 1600's seemed to be on to something)

Bill Dorrance seems to have learned lifes secret. That life is play. It's not going anywhere, we are there.
Any disipline can be used as a way of liberation- making pots, designing gardens, building houses and bridges, training horses, using the sword. It is not neccesary to advertise as a psychotherapist or guru. He is the artist in whatever he does, not in the sense of doing it beautifully but in the sense of playing it.

Totalitarian states know the danger of art and play. Rules are applied to modify behavior. We must play without knowing we are playing by the rules. But it is not playing in the sense of true art in the sense of the language older than words that Bill Dorrance shines a light on.

Punishment is negative reinforcement.
Reward is positive reinforcement.

The book is confusing manifestations of love, empathy and compassion with negative reinforcement. Expressions often found within many species.

Animals have been observed to lay their heads over a dying member of their own species until death...geese have been observed to lay their wings over a dying mate, softly calling to them and refusing to leave them until death. Wild Dogs (a species) are found to assign a "medic" that does nothing but tend to the needs of an injured member of the pack.

Behaviors such as these are not unique to human beings. A cross-species manifestation of the same type of behavor sometimes occurs between human beings and other species. It's recognizeable by some other species.

There is much truth in the fable of the lion, the mouse, and the thorn.

Seeing everything as "play" can make doing dishes "fun".

Retired Monk
"Ideology is a disease"

This message has been edited. Last edited by: polycarp,

quote:

Seeing everything as "play" can make doing dishes "fun".

True statement my friend!
It's been fourteen years since I got "clean and sober". In those early years the simplest actions became practices for being mindful and staying in the moment. You re-minded me of doing those dishes while reciting to my-self "now I am washing the front side, now I am washing the back side, now I am rinsing and now I am drying the dish." What a joy in such a simple action.

Here is a clarification of reinforcement within operant conditioning....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_reinforcement

The definition of negative reinforcement is the increase in a behavior due to the removal of an aversive stimulus. I added that restraint or pressuring of status is an aversive stimulus within some pack and herd animals.

These definitions do not appear anywhere in Dorrance's book. He is a good'ole boy, with no formal education in psychology. His expertise is all borne from experience. The book rambles just like many old people ramble (whose long term memories are more efficient than the short term variety). Don't go there for any formal philosophical or psychological insight unless you want to know the man. Despite that I can see he has made his own accurate discoveries about animals.

A better book would be, if you really wanted to know about horse whisperers is:

Natural Horsemanship Explained

http://www.robertmmiller.com/nahoexfrheto1.html

or True Unity by his brother Tom Dorrance

http://www.amazon.com/True-Unity-Willing-Communication-Between/dp/1884995098

or if your interest in the differences between nonsymbolic animals and hominids is broader just read these links:

http://www.grandin.com/inc/animals.in.translation.ch3.html

http://onphilosophy.wordpress.com/2006/09/17/people-and-animals/

Janek-
thanks for the links-

Note that in "negative reinforcement", the punishment has been applied first (conditioning). The removal of the punishment occurs afterwards to get the required response.

In the animal example, I can see how this can be applied. A removal of the punishment. As in the thorn from the lion by the mouse.

And inter-species bonds are formed by this sort of thing. They are formed simply because they are shared innate reactions among many species. Human beings are conditioned in the same manner.

Good cop / bad cop is a form of this. Punishmnent (bad cop) occurs first.

Human beings aren't as unique as we think them to be. And we have a large brain.

We had a regular visitor to the monastery. Wild birds would sit on his hands and shoulders and even reptiles approach and stay by his feet. The explanation? I certainly don't have one. He had an unexplainable connection with other species.

Retired Monk
"Ideology is a disease"

An aversive stimulus does not have to be present through formal conditioning i.e. the intentional application of a punishment. An aversive stimuli can be totally natural. For instance, any animal walking in the hot sun can inadvertently walk under some shade which will increase the behavior of walking towards the shade that will bring relief.

Life itself brings about suffering. Is that Buddha's first noble truth?

That is why I say that negative reinforcement is the primary way we regulate ourselves in society. Our society (and horse's or dog's) provides a conditional rule-bound aversive stimulus governed by culture or instinct, respectively.

Conforming to those rules through peer pressure is what makes us feel comfortable.

Sartre's most famous quote, "Hell is other people." can be generalized to hell is other animals

This message has been edited. Last edited by: janek,

Yes. We tend to avoid pain. Physical or emotional. And we also get "stuck" in this.

A situation similar to a learned pain avoidance will be avoided as well. Sometimes, a human being will move to an opposite extreme that causes just as much emotional or physical pain as what they are avoiding did. Never "love" again, etc.

Human beings tend to extend this realm way beyond the original event.,,,particularly through emotional symbolism. Often, an original emotional/physical pain event is forgotten consciously...and even similars to it will still trigger an avoidance response. That's why an "hour on the couch" with a "shrink" can turn into years.

Conforming to peer pressure is an avoidance of emotional discomfort, though sometimes not conforming can result in physical attack.

An attack for non-conforming is often an avoidance of feeling uncomfortable observing the non-conformance. Even the observance of non-conformance must be avoided. Religious nuts use Scripture to justify rigid conformity, but this is the true basis behind it. Avoidance of emotional discomfort.

Responses to emotional discomfort can be extinguished...by not avoiding the trigger and just allowing the response to be rather than reacting to it. Extinguishing of phobias is an example of this.

Human beings do some very strange things with their relatively very large brains.

"Suffering" is one of Bhudda's 4 Noble Truths. And it is brought about by one's own "thinking". He is not referring to outisde physical reality, but the internal one. Bhuddism could just as aptly be defined as eastern psychology rather than as a religion in the western sense of the words...and the results are somewhat astounding. I know some psychologists who have become Bhuddhists.

Retired Monk
"Ideology is a disease"

Polycarp said,

---Suffering" is one of Bhudda's 4 Noble Truths. And it is brought about by one's own "thinking". He is not referring to outisde physical reality, but the internal one.----

On his death bed, Buddha was reported to say in response to some well intended concilation,

"That is okay, now I'm just a suffering buddha".

I take that to mean he conceded to the physical inevitability of suffering. If there is one gaurentee in life is that we will all get sick and die. Its the attachment to suffering that creates even more suffering.

So, getting back to negative reinforcement in societies...

A horse in a herd also has social conditions imposed upon its growth, but the environment is not symbolic. Thus, a horse will not search for meaning but it will adapt its behavior to create the most harmony in the herd. Although there is conflict and testing of its place in the herd, the tests are simple, direct and uncomplicated. The restraint is a subtle aversion for a horse. Its' spirit or drive is always toward freedom and how much it get away with in the herd and knowing its status.

Thus a trainer, can use gentle restraining methods - with release of the restraint as a negative reinforcement reward. Negative
reinforcement creates a sense of earned place in the herd.

Although Dorrance speaks as if the horse's attention toward a human in training is trying to seek the meaning of what you are training it do, it really is only seeking to create a harmony (or as he puts it, "get alo