OPERANT CONDITIONING ? I live with a companion animal, a domesticated dog named Kaina. I named her after her subspecies Canis lupus familiaris, and of course both names, that given by me to her specifically, and that given to her species by science, are human constructs — just as is my ownership of her. The Invisible Fence of the English language is structured in such a way that it is simplest (and most conventionally understood) to say that she is my dog, as in my possession or my property, as if I could really own a sovereign living thing. This of course will, in time, seem incomprehensible to people, just as now the idea that you could own another human (like a slave perhaps) or that a mans wife was his property now seems abhorrent. Yet we are not many a generation removed from that way of thinking, and you can still see the remnant of it all around us. Living with a dog in a culture that still exerts ownership over her species brings up many interesting moral questions in my mind, such as Do humans own the species they have domesticated? and if not how then do we treat these species who are not capable of living independent lives in a wild envrionment they are no longer fit for (and scarcely still exists)? These are questions from which hunting and gathering peoples were free, as they never domesticated living things in quite this way. We, as a Civilization, consider ourselves to have come so far, but in truth we are a very long way from having a consistent ethos of freedom. I will hint to, though not digress very far into the following; corporations are now modifying species at the genetic level and this is allowing them to patent and own these unnaturally selected species. These organisms and all of their offspring are corporate genetic-slaves. Just saying... Fundamental to owning a species, or a member of a species, or even a member of ones own species, is the science of conditioning, both classical and operant. Classical conditioning is the method that Pavlov used to get his dogs to associate the sound of a ringing bell to food. Eventually he developed such a strong association that the dogs would begin salivating upon hearing the bell. This classical conditioning is all around us, just think of the response that is evoked in the average American when we talk about terrorism. A large scale coordinated attack on the US created the association with the word and imagery to deep feelings of vulnerability and fear. Now, by simply evoking the word or similar imagery (ringing the bell), it is possible to evoke a large scale fear response (salivating), which, it seems, has been very effective for creating a condition under which people will willfully relinquish their inalienable rights in exchange for protection from this terrible emotion. Isnt this the definition of terrorism – using panic and fear to illicit a desired outcome from the victims? Oops, there I go, digressing again... This type of conditioning is excellent for evoking a state change (as I read this I see multiple meanings, so let me be clear, I mean a state change, not a State change, though both seem true), but is not well suited to crafting specific behaviors. It is simply a response, but not a behavior that is created. The phone dings, and the brain releases dopamine. Simple physiology. The science of molding and shaping behavior and behavioral loops – a more complex and refined science – is known as Operant Conditioning, and is the same method I learned to use when training my dog. In order to alter my dogs behavior, to get her to sit on command for instance, or to jump through the hoop on my obstacle course, I had to learn about the science of rewards and punishments. Soon I realized, that this type of conditioning was all around me, and that it had been used to shape my behavior too. It works on domesticated dogs and it works just as well on dogs best friend... domesticated humans. Operant Conditioning is a very simple formula that, once learned, elucidates the underlying structure of the science of behavior modification. It reveals the way that the behavior of an organism (any organism) is modified by its environment, and thus, how behavior can be modified by a domesticator. Understanding the principles of operant conditioning is relatively easy, and our lesson begins with the definition of two terms, which form the main pillars upon which this kind of behaviour modification is structured. Those two categories are Reinforcement and Punishment. Think of Reinforcement as a reward. Operant Conditioning is built upon the idea that any behavior that is reinforced or rewarded is likely to be repeated by an organism. Think of punishment as… well… punishment; any behavior that is punished is less likely to be repeated by an organism. To modify behavior, then, it is essential to identify behaviors that one wants to encourage or see repeated, and reward them, and to similarly identify behaviors that one would like to see diminish or disappear, and punish them. Because life-forms will naturally seek out rewards and are fundamentally punishment-averse, they will, of their own volition, modify their behavior in response to these stimuli. To further dissect Operant Conditioning we must understand two more terms, qualifiers that modify the above terms. These are words with which we are all familiar, but which have a specific meaning within the context of the system of Operant Conditioning. The first is Positive (+) and the second is Negative (-). We must come to this subject with an open mind and allow the terms positive and negative to have new and unique meanings here, unhindered and free from the linguistic associations that most of us bring to the conversation. The former, Positive, does not mean good here, the way it usually does when we speak, but rather means to add something. It is a net-positive, in other words something is added (+) to the equation. Similarly but reciprocal, the latter, Negative, means the opposite. Rather than meaning “bad” as in the way we are most accustomed to using it, instead here it means to remove something, or something subtracted. These then, Reinforcement and Punishment, and Positive / Negative are the individual pieces of the Operant Conditioning equation. Now let’s look at the complete puzzle. Reinforcement can come in the form of a Positive or Negative. Positive Reinforcement is the addition of something pleasing (at the time a behavior is displayed) and it is employed to increase the likelihood that the behavior will be repeated. It is the addition of a reward. Something pleasing is given. That’s a good sit puppy, here is a treat! Reinforcement, however, can also come in the form of the subtraction of an unpleasant or painful stimuli, or the removal of something you don’t like. This too is a reward – though perhaps not as we usually think of it – and thus can be used to encourage a favorable behavior. This is known as Negative Reinforcement, essentially reward by removal of discomfort. Thats a good dog, let’s take that uncomfortable collar off of you. Reward, remember, is used to encourage behaviour that is desirable, and so is used to mold the behaviors of a living thing to ones desires. Punishments follow the same pattern, and can take the form of either a Positive or a Negative, both of which are designed to reduce the likelihood that a behavior will appear again. A Positive Punishment, which to the uninitiated sounds like a misnomer at best and a double negative at worst, introduces a stimulus that is unpleasant, such as a painful stimuli – like being struck for instance. “Bad dog!” *smack* “Get off the couch!” As you can see, Positive (+) means here the addition of something that wasn’t present before (in this case the strike and its associated physical and emotional pain – youve added the strike), so it carries a connotation that we don’t typically reserve the word for in day to day speech. Positive Punishments are usually the least pleasant! A Negative Punishment takes the form of the removal or subtraction of something good, something pleasant — something you want and often already have — to create a Punishment. This too has the effect of reducing the likelihood of this behavior being repeated. “Bad dog! That was too rough, I am putting your toy away” Both Positive and Negative Reinforcement — when delivered at the right moment, which is the moment immediatley proceeding the behavior — increase the likelihood that a given behavior will be associated with the Reward, and thus will likely be repeated again. This repetition of the behaviour is part of what we can call Reward Seeking Behavior. Both Positive and Negative Punishment – when delivered at precielsy the right moment, again immediately following the behavior – becomes associated with the behavior. The organism, once it has associated the behavior with Punishment, will be less inclined to repeat the behavior. Punishments associated with a specific action creates an aversion to that action. Because organisms are supremely adaptable and naturally seek comfort and pleasure whilst simultaneously moving away from discomfort and pain, reinforcement and punishment cause self-induced modifications in behavior. Below is a simple illustration using my Glyph as an infographic to explain Operant Conditioning. It is through these four possible combinations of Reinforcements and Punishments that behavior is molded, shaped; and it’s as true for wild things as it is for domesticated creatures. The difference is that when these four training tools are presented naturally by the environment and its associated organisms and web of life, as in the case of the wild world, behaviors are shaped in such a way that each organism becomes better suited to living within, and thus supporting its fellow community of life. Wild Operant Conditioning creates fitness for a symbiotic community of organisms, and helps structure the complex and interwoven networks we call ecosystems. In the case of Artificial Operant Conditioning, these four tools are plied to shape and mold the behavior of an organism to human will, for the benefit of humans. Most often it involves altering a creatures natural behaviors in favor of ones that are programmed by the domesticator. It is, in essence, the method by which domesticated species and slaves are made, and is used to make an individual more fit for its servitude. If we are able to see ourselves as The Domesticated Ape, and we simultaneously seek to ReWild Ourselves, we would be well served to discover the Reinforcements and Punishments that are now – currently – shaping our behaviours. These are most often taking place beneath our cognitive baseline, subconsciously modifying our actions and eradicating our natural tendencies – reinforcing our expressions as subservient domesticated, slave-like fragili. read more: https://danielvitalis.creatavist/the-operant-condition
Posted on: Tue, 27 Jan 2015 08:16:13 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015