tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7294505416127496842.post1541692874123040035..comments2024-03-25T14:09:59.347-05:00Comments on Augoeides: The Operant EquationScott Stenwickhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12389664381513219613noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7294505416127496842.post-72477095668248992392011-06-09T12:05:06.942-05:002011-06-09T12:05:06.942-05:00Cool. Thanks!Cool. Thanks!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7294505416127496842.post-34612192801207172242011-06-08T23:06:58.453-05:002011-06-08T23:06:58.453-05:00Like Peter Carroll's equations on which mine a...Like Peter Carroll's equations on which mine are based, the 0-1 values are at least to a degree subjective. It's easier to take a known probability shift and work backwards, looking at the several variables. Unlike Carroll's, my version produces a real probability value, whereas his deals only in 0-1 factors that behave like percentages. As you suggest, it's also a good analytical tool for trying to tease out the various components.<br /><br />Basically the neuroscience research I'm talking about are studies refuting the idea of an "unconscious mind" as it's discussed in psychoanalysis - that is, some sort of repository of "repressed material" presided over by some sort of "censor" function that explains why you, say, can't remember everything that has ever happened to you. It's relevant here because the "psychic censor" is a fundamental component of Carroll's model that's completely absent in mine. Simply, there's no evidence that anything remotely like it exists.Scott Stenwickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12389664381513219613noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7294505416127496842.post-92127919174523957422011-06-08T16:13:33.811-05:002011-06-08T16:13:33.811-05:00Very cool. I love the equation. How do you determi...Very cool. I love the equation. How do you determine the value of each of the variables? Or is this more of a guideline, to get people thinking about all the factors so they can identify which is low, without necessarily assigning a specific value to each? Either way, very cool.<br /><br />Also, could you expand on this section that you said in passing:<br /><br />"that there is some unconscious part of your mind that works magick for you by responding to symbolic information. I don't believe that, and the most recent research in neuroscience supports my position."<br /><br />I'm not familiar with the current research on that, but I'd love to hear more about it.<br /><br />Thanks!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com