Science Forums: The Mind - Brain relationship - Science Forums

Jump to content

Welcome to ScienceForums.Net!

Welcome to ScienceForums.Net! We welcome science discussion at all levels — from beginners to researchers, covering topics from biology to computer science, and much more. Registration is fast and free, and allows you to post on the forums, so register now and join the discussions!
  
After you've registered, come in and introduce yourself, or visit the forum index. If you need any help  registering, posting, or if you just have some questions about our site, please feel free to contact us at staff at scienceforums dot net.

  • Start new topics and reply to others
  • Subscribe to topics and forums to get automatic updates
  • Create a ScienceForums.Net Blog!
Guest Message © 2012 DevFuse
  • 2 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

The Mind - Brain relationship Is there any ? Rate Topic: -----

#21 Imza 


Lepton
Interesting thread and I would have to both agree and disagree with the notion that the word "mind" is not useful. I think B.F. Skinner made the same argument and rightly so when he stated that the concept of "mind" is the relic of prescientific way of thinking about human behavior. However, even though I agree with Skinner that in terms of trying to understand human behavior is helped by not using the term mind, I think the term is still useful. It is obviously used in everyday language that helps us communicate "what's on your mind?, etc..." but also can be very helpful in therapeutic approaches. For example, trying to explain thoughts in terms of "covert behavior" would only serve to confuse clients rather than help them understand what your trying to say.

Quote

Self-consciousnessnecessitates behaviors that suggest an awareness of a distincition between selfand surrounding influence. Proactive behaviors necessitates a capacity toassess and anticipate consequence. This is evidence of anticipatory mentationprior to behavioral responses suggestive of reactions without such assessments.A mind is shown by reactions to stimuli that isn't typical of the instinctualresponse to such stimuli. For example, flight in response to any and all suddenloud noise suggests an instinctual response. However, calm amid some sudden andloud noise suggest a distinction process assessing a non-threat. This is anassessment of the consequences of not reacting to loud noises.

I'm still a bit confused by you term "mentation" here. In this case it seems like mentation is being described as anything that leads to behavior that would not be indicated as an instinctual behavior. However, I'm not sure what you mean by "mentation", it seems like it's another term for mental activity.

View PostPhDwannabe, on 10 November 2011 - 07:20 PM, said:

Could youclarify what you mean by "mentation," exactly? It seems like you'retalking about thought, in some sense. One of the hallmarks of behavioral theoryis that it does a relatively lovely job of explaining behavior without the needfor thought (or a "mind") of any kind. Indeed, a big part of thepoint is sort of that conditioning is a process mechanistically well-definedenough that it does not necessarily imply or necessitate a mind. But whatyou're saying might be subtle, so I'm interested to hear what you mean here.



Granted there are some behavioral theories that do not try to explain behavior by using the term mind, I think it's inaccurate to say that behavioral theory does not include thoughts (or what people typically refer to as "mind"). Behavioral theory (at least from a behavior analytic, Skinnerian perspective) does incorporate thought but considers thoughts as covert behaviors. In this sense, what is typically called "mind" is simply the behavior within the skin.


0

#22 PhDwannabe 


Atom

Quote

Granted there are some behavioral theories that do not try to explain behavior by using the term mind, I think it's inaccurate to say that behavioral theory does not include thoughts (or what people typically refer to as "mind"). Behavioral theory (at least from a behavior analytic, Skinnerian perspective) does incorporate thought but considers thoughts as covert behaviors. In this sense, what is typically called "mind" is simply the behavior within the skin.

More classical behavioral theories, I think, try to do things pretty well without a mind. More familiar "radical behaviorism" that has influenced a lot of the modern treatments, well yeah, it simply sees covert events as being governed lawfully in the same manner as overt ones. Your note is well-taken.
0

#23 DrmDoc 


Baryon

View PostImza, on 17 November 2011 - 12:32 AM, said:

I'm still a bit confused by you term "mentation" here. In this case it seems like mentation is being described as anything that leads to behavior that would not be indicated as an instinctual behavior. However, I'm not sure what you mean by "mentation", it seems like it's another term for mental activity.


Taber's Cyclopedic Medical Dictionary defines mentation as mental activity, which is activity relating to the mind. If a behavioral response isn't instinctual, then it is likely learned behavior as I have previous suggested. Learned behaviors in complex animals suggest the kind of sensory recognition, assessment, and memorization activity, within the brains of these animals, that could be associated with mental activity.

This post has been edited by DrmDoc: 17 November 2011 - 05:26 PM

0

Share this topic:


  • 2 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users