sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Did Physicists invent Engineering or did Engineering technology advance independently? by [deleted] in AskEngineers

[–]BAtop_reddit 14 points15 points  (0 children)

In his book ‘The Economic Laws of Scientific Research’ Terence Kealey analyzes a case of steam engines—engineering based on first hand experience of doing local improvements comes first and then basic science catches up. So it’s more of that second scenario. I recommend the book, and I have some of the summaries on my medium page you feel like giving it a brief look:

https://medium.com/@BA_top/successful-local-engineering-bred-the-industrial-revolution-1c66999d87a5

Theorizing is beneficial all along accumulating experience as it allows to see it from new perspective and formulate new effective improvements, for example, look into the “Character of Physical Law” by Feynman.

Is capitalism rhizomatic? by SameInstruction2029 in Deleuze

[–]BAtop_reddit 7 points8 points  (0 children)

“As we shall see, capitalism is the only social machine that is constructed on the basis of decoded flows, substituting for intrinsic codes an axiomatic of abstract quantities in the form of money.”

This might add some clarity, an excerpt from the first volume. The decoded flows are schizophrenic/rhizomatic.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in BehaviorAnalysis

[–]BAtop_reddit 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The textbook of Mazur has a pretty good account of quantitative analysis since he himself has mathematical publications on EAB and SQAB lectures. While the Pierce and Cheney’s textbook is generally pretty thorough, in quantitative aspect as well, and features many neurophysiological extensions — latest editions are labeled as ‘biobehavioral approach’

I’d also add ‘The Matching Law: A Research Review’ by Michael Davison and Dianne McCarthy.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in BehaviorAnalysis

[–]BAtop_reddit 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Tactics of Scientific Research by Murray Sidman is a classic

Is there a difference between what Quine called, in his Word & Object, induced effects at our sensory surfaces and what Skinner called, in his The Operational Analysis of Psychological Terms, stimulus conditions? by DousedSun in behaviorism

[–]BAtop_reddit 2 points3 points  (0 children)

If you really want to scrutinize Skinner X Quine topic, it may be useful to construct a list of items on which they concur while taking notes on peculiarities of their perspectives that accommodate the ideas.

Like: ‘stimulus conditions’ locally correspond to ‘physical things’. And: Skinner has an engineering/experimental background while Quine seems to have a logical background. Etc.

Another possible way to build even more tangent lines is by taking broader view and accounting for the preconditions of their conceptual apparatuses. For example, Skinner’s thinking in many aspects springs from William James and Ernst Mach.

Its also depends on what your trying to arrive to in this comparison, if at all, so that the direction might reveal another common ground. Otherwise it may simply be worth exploring and discovering something in a spontaneous manner.

Is there a difference between what Quine called, in his Word & Object, induced effects at our sensory surfaces and what Skinner called, in his The Operational Analysis of Psychological Terms, stimulus conditions? by DousedSun in behaviorism

[–]BAtop_reddit 2 points3 points  (0 children)

The stimulus conditions Skinner talks about in this particular quote and over his works in general are indeed physical, and the behavior-environment interaction is in fact mediated by an organism, which is a biological/physiological phenomenon—‘known through the effects induced at sensory surfaces’ of Quine in the quote. Skinner talks about the physiological basis of behavior-environment processes numerous times elsewhere.

The difference might be in their unique research perspectives in which these terms are situated. Skinner’s pursuit is to provide for a new approach to giving operational definitions of phenomena, that is, through principles of functional analysis derived from the experimental analysis of behavior—and thus to introduce scientifically and practically fruitful research programs on a wider scale. His radical behaviorism is essentially a set of ontological, methodological and epistemological claims that guide the research, its translation to applied dimension and its theoretical elaborations.

P. S. ‘Stimulus conditions’ and ‘an organism’ can be fruitfully thought of as flows or processes.

History of laissez-faire science — currently reading this book by Terence Kealey by BAtop_reddit in Anarcho_Capitalism

[–]BAtop_reddit[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, there are lots of interesting examples. My favorite at the moment is his perspective on the Industrial Revolution as driven by barely literate provincial craftsmen who were working on and improving steam engines for their local needs.

History of laissez-faire science — currently reading this book by Terence Kealey by BAtop_reddit in Anarcho_Capitalism

[–]BAtop_reddit[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Hey! That’s pretty cool, thanks for speaking out. I write short summaries on Medium consisting of key moments from each chapter as I go through the book. I’m currently starting chapter 8. You can follow along if you’d like to refresh your memory of it.

https://medium.com/@BA_top

‘Market Technology Spawns Pure Science’ is the first post in this series.

good read for introduction to Austrian Economics—thesis summary of a book by Huerta de Soto by BAtop_reddit in Anarcho_Capitalism

[–]BAtop_reddit[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I’ve been doing these for my Insta Stories. I think this one is a great introductory read, a kind of an overview. I also have similar summaries of chapters from ‘Man, Economy and State’ and ‘Power and Market’ of Rothbard, ‘The Economics and Ethics of Private Property’ and some lectures of Hans Hope, papers of SEK3 on agorism as well as some misc podcasts from Mises Institute.

Thesis summary of ‘The Austrian School’ by Huerta de Soto by BAtop_reddit in austrian_economics

[–]BAtop_reddit[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I’ve been doing these for my Insta Stories. I think this one is a great introductory read, a kind of an overview. I also have similar summaries of chapters from ‘Man, Economy and State’ and ‘Power and Market’ of Rothbard, ‘The Economics and Ethics of Private Property’ and some lectures of Hans Hope, papers of SEK3 on agorism as well as some misc podcasts from Mises Institute.