if we had access to the vocabulary of operant conditioning we'd have a framework for observing tons of everyday mind control shit. like, adding an aversive stimulus is positive punishment, but once the agent accepts the stimulus as normal, removing it is negative reinforcement
-
Show this thread
-
or the requirement that the agent perceive a connection between its actions and the stimulus means there's such a thing as reinforcement capture, where you convince the agent that what it did that you want conditioned is what generated the reinforcing stimulus instead of what did
1 reply 1 retweet 21 likesShow this thread -
but we can't have these conversations because literal psychology professors will tell you in a classroom that "negative reinforcement" is a fancy term for punishment, and even if they don't fuck that up the chances of "positive punishment" passing their lips are nil
3 replies 0 retweets 19 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @chaosprime
Tbh its just language being a bitch. If we could stop saying positive to mean good and negative to mean bad that would fix many science-to-layperson translation problems. But we won’t.
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @rainherself
or technically i guess psychology and cybernetics and whatever could just leave the stone at the bottom of the hill and start saying "additive" and "subtractive" instead of "positive" and "negative"
4 replies 1 retweet 10 likes -
-
I mean, I definitely learned 'negative reinforcement == punishment' in college from the actual course books.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
jesus wept
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.