|
|
TheMilkyWay
Posted : 3/17/2011 3:09:42 PM
newly found page 7 and 22 -
- TheMilkyWay
- Joined on 11-02-2010
- Posts 105
- Points 0
|
Re: Sagan’s Baloney Detection Kit on NDT philosophy
I attended a lecture by Dr. Margulis on symbiogenesis. Her opening
statement was that all mutations are deleterious. She's a credentialed first
tier scientist who doesn't believe in theory of random mutations.
You are lying or misunderstood her. I am familiar with
Margulis work (essays, articles, books, papers etc) nothing in her published
history would support such a claim. You might as well claim that Fermat didn’t
believe in prime
numbers. | |
-
-
 TheMilkyWay
-
-
- Joined on 11-02-2010
- Posts 105
- Points 0
|
Re: Sagan’s Baloney Detection Kit on NDT philosophy
However by definition if emotion is a universal feature of animal
consciousness, it cannot therefore be a function of instinct since instincts are
species-specific fixed action patterns dependent on more customized sets of
genes and which keep the various species specifically adapted to their
evolutionary niches. Another fail. For argument’s sake we
shall say that emotions are feature that a particular clade has in common, this
not however mean that there can’t be a species specific reaction to those
emotions. He also fails to realize that animals can adapt their behavior,
as if an animal is fixed in it’s response to emotional experience. As
Michael Levin demonstrated in ‘The Evolution of Understanding” there is
no need for emotion to be involved in order to achieve communication. There is
no need to invent a constructs like ‘networked intelligence in order to explain
communication in animals. Once again, Behan introduces unnecessary
elements that add nothing.
| |
-
- poodleOwned
- Joined on 01-13-2009
- Melbourne Australia
- Posts 461
- Points 100
|
Re: Sagan’s Baloney Detection Kit on NDT philosophy
 Kevin
Behan:I'm articulating what I've learned from a lifetime of observing dogs,
easily many tens of thousands, and many other animals as well, without
projecting thoughts into their heads. Eventually over several decades, emotion
as the organizing principle of the animal mind and as the basis of a group
consciousness, became apparent and this is why I don't use other terminology
because 99.99% of it is embedded with particular meanings that aren't what I'm
trying to say. You may not think such practical experience on the
farm/kennel/woods is valuable, but I believe it offers a window into the animal
mind unavailable any other way and I very much look forward to showing any
scientist who is truly interested in the emotional underpinnings of empathy,
cooperation and altruism, a thing or two about what I've discovered. I can
assure you a good time will be had by all.
Kevin, I think you should retract this statement. It is pretty ugly and just
further undermines your position. At least two of us that are currently debating
with you use the scienctific method every day and we don't get to make mistakes
because if we people may die. Pardon us for bringing the same concerns to our
life with dogs.
There are also several other trainers on this board that just don't seem to
want to claim their specialness in observations, but are quietly going about
changing peoples and dogs lives without this level of self importance.
As for me i am just some kind of amateur mug. My dogs aren't Shutzhund
breeds, but you might know if you cared to do even basic research what they had
to do to get a couple of the titles in FRONT of their name.On top of that is the
tracking group i take which is had more than it's share of success with non
fancied breeds often with poor starts in life. I also have co started a group
that considers some of these new theories and puts them in to training. My older
dog has this weird title UD after her name. Now it wasn't easy with her, she had
a hassle or two on the way but i am dam sure that some of Panksepps ideas got me
there. She is one of the very few minis in our country to have a UD title,and i
am pretty sure the only one to have UD and TCh. You might like to look up your
own AKC records and see how many minis on your country have TDX...
I sure did read you book I unfortunately paid you more politeness than you
are paying Panksepp. Frankly to me it was indecipheral rubbish with huge
mistakes in science nearly every where i looked. I tried to be charitable but
that was my view. Where as with Panksepp and some others, despite the academic
orientation gave me clear lucid well researched referenced and well trailled
concepts that enhanced my training.
So lets stop the slagging of some Brilliant Scientists, and the increase of
your own importance by claiming special knowlegde, climb down of the pedestal
and be gracious about being licked.
As Monty Python said " he aint the Messiah , just a naughty boy...." sic
porbably got the quote wrong :)
Tch Cadbury CDX (RIP)
Tch Nascere Bella Nera
UD
Ch Jenuin Constanine TD | |
-
-
- corgidog
-
-
- Joined on 12-26-2010
- Posts 24
- Points 0
|
Re: Sagan’s Baloney Detection Kit on NDT philosophy
TheMilkyWay:
I attended a lecture by Dr. Margulis on symbiogenesis. Her opening
statement was that all mutations are deleterious. She's a credentialed first
tier scientist who doesn't believe in theory of random mutations.
You are lying or misunderstood her. I am familiar with
Margulis work (essays, articles, books, papers etc) nothing in her published
history would support such a claim. You might as well claim that Fermat didn’t
believe in prime numbers. themilkyway, it's clear
that you disagree with kbehan and you think that his ideas are just mumbo jumbo
nonsense. anyone reading this thread would not mistake you as a proponent for
the ndt philosophy. so... you need not constantly repost the same thing with
different verbiage. you say above that kbehan is lying. can you go on
record and clarify how kbehan is lying and explain dr margulis's view on
symbiogenesis and evolutionary biology as it relates to this discusion?
also can you explain this quote taken from wikipedia on dr margulis
which tends to agree with the point kbehan was making? "She does,
however, hold a negative view of certain interpretations of Neo-Darwinism,
excessively focused on inter-organismic competition, as she believes that
history will ultimately judge them as comprising "a minor twentieth-century
religious sect within the sprawling religious persuasion of Anglo-Saxon
Biology." 
She also believes that proponents of the standard theory "wallow in their
zoological, capitalistic, competitive, cost-benefit interpretation of Darwin -
having mistaken him... Neo-Darwinism, which insists on [the slow accrual of
mutations by gene-level natural selection], is a complete funk." She opposes such
competition-oriented views of evolution, stressing the importance of symbiotic
or cooperative relationships between species."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lynn_Margulis And this teaser as well.
How do species originate? Lynn Margulis presents an answer to the
one enduring mystery of evolution that Charles Darwin could never solve: the
source of the inherited variation that gives rise to new species. |These
researchers argue that random mutation, long believed (but never demonstrated)
to be the main source of genetic variation, is of only marginal importance. Much
more significant is the acquisition of new genomes by symbiotic merger.
http://www.isepp.org/Pages/San%20Jose%2004-05/MargulisSaganSJ.html
| |
-
- poodleOwned
-
-
- Joined on 01-13-2009
- Melbourne Australia
- Posts 461
- Points 100
|
Re: Sagan’s Baloney Detection Kit on NDT philosophy
Sure i have bragging rights on my dogs, but the idea that some how looking at
a bunch of information without critical assesment is dangerous. It borders on
the "take my word for it" kind of science. Our two favourite kind of Sales
People, the "Trust MeS' and the "S**t yehas". I did read his book, it has
nothing much useful or coherent to say. Of course you are welcome to start
itemising these points and you might like to point to the places in his book
that would solve intense nosie phobias in a poodle, and actually show evidence
that in the heat of competition that it worked. You might like to tell me also
how you would get a bunch of novice handlers and quit edifficult dogs and get
them tracking... from his book. After all it is based on "practical "
knowledge.
The point that i was making was a little indirect. In my dog life and my
professional life, when there is doubt no one believes you unless you turn up
with "practical results".Some how "practical results" mean a whole lot more than
succesful deduction based on scientific principals. This phrase dirves me
through the roof, but there you go i have just given you some "practical
results". Since i am not a particually practical person i don't seek them per
say. They happen as a result of the training that i do.
Do i have special knowledge? Of course not. As i said i am just an Amateur.
Does Kevin .. of course not.
Tch Cadbury CDX (RIP)
Tch Nascere Bella Nera
UD
Ch Jenuin Constanine TD | |
-
-
- poodleOwned
-
-
- Joined on 01-13-2009
- Melbourne Australia
- Posts 461
- Points 100
|
Re: Sagan’s Baloney Detection Kit on NDT philosophy
corgidog:
though, i'd agree that lack of critical assessment can be dangerous in
certain circumstances. however, we're talking about dog training. and not
training them to build bridges or fly airplanes. so it's really not that
dangerous. furthermore, when you consider the level of aggression of dogs in
america/the world and the lack of kbehan's ideas in the marketplace, you can't
possibly say it's dangerous learning and practicing ndt
I am not so sure of that at all !! Are you now saying that it doesn't pass
muster scientically, so lets just do it in any case? I guess that isn't any
worse than any other of the gurus around the place but i prefer soundly based
science to train my dogs thanks. My dogs my responsibilty and quite frankly the
best that I can do for them. It doesn't include stuff that doesn't or only
partially works.
corgidog:
people have success stories with aggressive dogs (including neil
himself)
Pardon my sceptism.I had this emotional sense of entire weariness.
(Not one of Panksepps!!!) Unfortunately this is the usual claim of every
dog training charlatan out there. A few do something, quite a few are just
plain cruel, and the rest just burn up money and time. I think a large number
are palebo effect only. But that is my observation only. Any others care to
comment? Am i being too cycnical?
Tch Cadbury CDX (RIP)
Tch Nascere Bella Nera
UD
Ch Jenuin Constanine TD | |
-
- Kevin Behan
-
-
- Joined on 12-23-2010
- Posts 132
- Points 0
|
Re: Sagan’s Baloney Detection Kit on NDT philosophy
It's not God-like powers, one's digestive system recognizes the essence
(energy) of things. At the risk of being graphic, if a dog has an unformed bowel
movement, disgusting. If it has a formed one, not disgusting. Food that is
plated and eaten in a civilized way, not disgusting. Food mashed together and
eaten with mouth open, disgusting.
There's nothing mystical about what I'm saying, the confluence of energies in
the body and brain (these are real because they are generated by the body and
brain's physiological and neurological processes) are attracted to emotional
grounds, and this can be verified by anyone who pays attention to how one
feels.
In fact a 50% divorce rate proves that attraction cannot be extinguished
because due to the principle of conservation, a state of attraction is conserved
as its equal and opposite form, stress, hence the divorce.
| |
-
- poodleOwned
-
-
- Joined on 01-13-2009
- Melbourne Australia
- Posts 461
- Points 100
|
Re: Sagan’s Baloney Detection Kit on NDT philosophy
Kevin
Behan:
There's nothing mystical about what I'm saying, the confluence of energies
in the body and brain (these are real because they are generated by the body and
brain's physiological and neurological processes) are attracted to emotional
grounds, and this can be verified by anyone who pays attention to how one
feels.
This is absolute nonsense. Would you care to rephrase so that my opinion has
some chance of being changed ?
Tch Cadbury CDX (RIP)
Tch Nascere Bella Nera
UD
Ch Jenuin Constanine TD | |
-
- corvus
- Joined on 08-02-2006
- Australia (NSW)
- Posts 2,886
- Points 85
|
Re: Sagan’s Baloney Detection Kit on NDT philosophy
Burl:
Did you ever tickle the hare?
Hehehe, tried, but he's not keen on physical contact. He's sometimes amenable
to a head or shoulder rub, which to him is kind of like laying his life in my
hands. He occasionally boxed my hand when he was a baby, though. It's hard for a
hare to translate hare behaviours to a human context.
| |
-
- corvus
-
-
- Joined on 08-02-2006
- Australia (NSW)
- Posts 2,886
- Points 85
|
Re: Sagan’s Baloney Detection Kit on NDT philosophy
If we can maybe cut the hostility for a moment, perhaps Kevin can explain
what his theories add to the body of knowledge in animal behaviour? I for one am
still a wee bit confused about what the point is. To me, little old scientist
with a splash of experience with small, wild animals, there are lots of odd
little things that go on with attention. I like the general idea of push and
pull, here. I know the best way to put a wary bird with a nest at ease so she
goes to the nest and shows you where it is is to pretend you are completely
disinterested in her. To me, it's all in the advantage of being able to read
some kind of universal body language. If I'm a small prey animal, it behooves me
to pay attention to what large prey animals are looking at. If they are looking
at me, I should be worried, because they might want to eat me. If their body is
taut and they are staring at me, I should be bloody terrified because chances
are they are going to try to eat me. I don't have to be able to think all that
consciously to fly away before the cat pounces on me. I just have to see things
that frighten me. It would make sense that I am wired to find these things
frightening. I don't like my chances of learning it when a mistake could cost me
my life. There's a theory that negative stimuli tend to be more uniform across
species and individuals than positive stimuli, because the stakes for negative
stimuli are high.
The other thing is it pays to be curious. In some circumstances. A population
appears to usually have both shy and bold animals. Sometimes it's good to have a
high flight threshold and sometimes it's bad. Animals can be born one way or
another and change their behaviour depending on the environment. It's all very
elegant and makes perfect evolutionary sense to me at least.
So my question is, if it behooves animals to be born with a sense of body
space, and a sensitivity to attention and basic, universal body language (an
animal about to explode into action ALWAYS looks tense and bunched up), what
does push and pull bring to this? Why can't an animal just have a natural
tendency to pay attention to these things because if they don't they get
eaten?
 | |
-
 Burl
-
- Joined on 08-04-2010
- Baton Rouge
- Posts 262
- Points 55
|
Re: Sagan’s Baloney Detection Kit on NDT philosophy
Did you see the video yet, Kevin?
To
Kevin “This is absolute nonsense. Would you care to rephrase so that my opinion
has some chance of being changed ?”
Kevin and Sean, there is a reason so
many detractors of Kevin’s writing will agree with this quote, and I think you
both must know it is about his insistence upon speaking atonally – I literally
cringe when trying to read Kevin. Amd I REALLY do try. Honestly, it hurts me in
a visceral way, as though my intelligence is being assaulted while I am expected
to endure a wandering ramble of incoherent metaphor expressed in terminology
totally unconnected with the subject at hand.
“we're talking about dog
training. and not training them to build bridges or fly airplanes. so it's
really not that dangerous. furthermore, when you consider the level of
aggression of dogs in america/the world and the lack of kbehan's ideas in the
marketplace, you can't possibly say it's dangerous learning and practicing
ndt.”
Please, for the sake of argument of this thread, list the top 5
novel insights of NDT, and we can judge as to whethere it differs from what
other trainers and behavioral researchers say.
Sean, your writing is
lucid, as is LCK’s. For heaven’s sake, if Kevin really has something novel to
bring us and you know what it is, why don’t you write it up in an article and
post it on your site. I would love to read
that.
| |
-
- Kevin Behan
-
-
- Joined on 12-23-2010
- Posts 132
- Points 0
|
Re: Sagan’s Baloney Detection Kit on NDT philosophy
(In answer to the concise point of your question) The body extracts energy
from nutrients and produces things, bile, blood, ions, hormones, heart beats,
fat, peristalsis, synapses, etc., etc. and I'm saying that we're looking too
narrowly at the specific functions of these, as in for example that the
fundamental purpose of neurons is to produce instincts, habits or thoughts.
Rather, the various organs are organized to be in a dynamic state of tension
(Joseph Campbell) and then around which consciousness is organized. This tension
(the "competing" needs of the organs for the same nutrients) is another word for
energy, and moreover, it is information because it now compels the mind to be
attracted to that which can resolve this internal state of conflict.(Damasio
says the homeostatic condition of internal things functioning smoothly is the
psychological basis for the experience of well being. I'm taking this a step
further.) So for example the waste products of a body aren't actually waste
products, they are statements of resolution of this constitutional state of
tension and this is the best explanation for why dogs RUSH over to investigate
(and often consume) other dog's (not to mention human's) eliminations, (a
tendency that directly contradicts the central thesis of modern biology--Matt
Ridley in "The Red Queen"--that parasite/host interplay is the basis of sexual
selection.) Anything that resolves this constitutional conflict I call a
"preyful essence" or an emotional ground. So a mother looks down on her baby's
healthy eliminations and feels completed, a stranger feels disgusted.
To expand on this, I'm saying that the body/mind evolved to be first and
foremost an action potential, an energy dynamo, as its fundamental role which I
have come to believe is far more basic then gene replication or individual
survival. If we watch dogs in particular from this frame of mind, then what they
do takes on a new meaning for we can then see the principles of movement and
inherent properties of emotion in the complex things they do as these are
physical embodiment of the laws of nature, i.e. energy, put into overt acts of
behavior. And if we follow it out, we find that the resolution of this internal
conflict always ends up in linked-minds because it is very easy for two beings
to share the same feeling, because at bedrock a feeling constitutes an advanced
statement of resolution of the internal constitutional conflict. So having
someone hold our hand during a difficult moment doesn't actually do anything to
prevent what's going to happen (although latest research is exploring how the
electromagnetic field of the heart can in fact change the brain waves because
the former is 5,000 times stronger than the latter) but we're sharing a feeling
and thus are already in a state of resolution. Therefore dogs have adapted to
human ways not because they figure out what we're thinking and come to share our
reason, but because they feel what we're feeling (even when we don't know what
we're feeling) and come to share the deepest part of our mind. | |
Hey, it's way more fun
when you sign up or log in
|