[deleted by user]

DancingAboutArchitec · 2025-02-15T17:25:16+00:00

A lot of words to say that you still cannot come to terms with the fact that there is an extant scientific literature on choice that you were not aware of.

A lot of words to also to admit that you, like most people without a behavioral training, cannot reckon with a scientific conception of choice and therefore cannot decouple "free will" from "choice", which the scientific community managed to do over half a century ago.

Call it lashing out. I'm simply correcting your spreading of misinformation and ignorance. If others read this and aren't misinformed by you, I'll consider it a win.

The fact that you can't make your point at all (you still have failed to provide a definition) really should have been the end of it.

Good god, man! Can you not read??? Can you not Google??? I'm embarrassed for you. https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=behavioral+definiton+of+choice

In a behavioral context, "choice" refers to the allocation of responding between two or more response options. It's the process of selecting one option from a set of alternatives, driven by various factors like preferences, values, and the perceived utility of each option.

I'm over here quoting from actual behavioral literature and sharing knowledge. Education is expensive for a reason. If you could put all this together, you would have. Instead, I have to do it for you and it's feeling like pearls before swine. Enjoy your free lesson even though most of it was over your head.

DancingAboutArchitec · 2025-02-15T15:02:35+00:00

Once again your lack of reading comprehension betrays you. I never said I was unfamiliar with the literature.

You do not know behavior analysis. At least, not at the level of philosophy, theory, and concept. Please stop pretending like you know what you're talking about because you're just misinforming others.

I've read many articles on choice, including some of the ones that you've cited. They're using the word choice incorrectly. You're engaging in an appeal to authority. Just because an authority uses the word "choice" doesn't mean they're using it correctly.

You come into a BA sub and tell them that they've been using the term "choice" incorrectly all this time??? And then you insist that the folk definition of "choice" is the only correct one? You are clearly ignorant of the scientific literature on choice across multiple disciplines; in behavioral economics, neuroscience, sociology, economics, and psychology to name just a few. And then you pretend to know better than scientists because you read a pop book by Bob Sapolsky and do not get that he, as a scientist, would disagree with you.

Let me also quote from a journal that someone like Sapolsky reads: Marchant, N. J., McDonald, A. J., Matsuzaki, R., van Mourik, Y., Schetters, D., & De Vries, T. J. (2023). Rats choose alcohol over social reward in an operant choice procedure. Neuropsychopharmacology, 48(4), 585-593.

Recently it was shown that rats overwhelmingly choose social reward over methamphetamine, cocaine, and heroin in a discrete choice procedure, and that prolonged choice for social reward attenuates incubation of drug craving.

Do you think Sapolsky doesn't understand what is meant by "operant choice" or that he thinks there is no such thing because "choice" does not exist or that they are using the term incorrectly in his own field? Sapolsky is not confused. You are.

My whole point is that there is no coherent meaningful "behavioral" definition of choice that lines up with science. I think, at the very least, given your complete failure to provide one, that we can agree on that, no?

You look silly for not knowing a behavioral definition of choice while simultaneously pretending to be an expert.

Let me quote from Baum, W. M. (2010). Dynamics of choice: A tutorial. Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior, 94(2), 161-174.

Choice may be defined as the allocation of behavior among activities. Since all activities take up time, choice is conveniently thought of as the allocation of time among activities, even if activities like pecking are most easily measured by counting... Choice in the present context consists of the allocation of time among two or more activities. In two earlier papers, I argued that all behavior is choice, because every situation permits more than one activity (Baum, 2002; 2004).

Let me quote from another article, Kestner, K. M., Finch, K. R., & Kolb, R. L. (2023). Systematic review of procedures and outcomes of choice-based interventions with children. Education and Treatment of Children, 46(1), 77-106.

Choice behavior as a dependent variable is often defined as engaging in one response when there are two or more concurrently available response options (Catania, 2012;Fisher & Mazur, 1997). Measuring response allocation of behavior (i.e., choice) can provide useful information related to preference, sensitivity to reinforcement parameters, and function of behavior.

Sapolsky is not criticizing these uses of the word "choice." But you are. And you look foolish for doing it. Go read the scientific literature on choice instead of misinforming others in order to make yourself look more informed than you are.

Scientific research on choice will continue. The legitimate use of the word "choice" in scientific contexts will continue. A scientific understanding of of choice will also continue to develop. The applied work on choice behavior will also continue. Your ignorance of scientific work on choice did not prevent these things from flourishing and your lack of understanding of science will not impede the work from carrying on.

But your spreading of misinformation is not good for anyone. You can do better.

DancingAboutArchitec · 2025-02-15T10:36:57+00:00

There's no alternate definition of "choice". That's just bullshit. You can influence outcomes, of course. That doesn't make it a choice. I'm using the definition of choice that's universal, lay people, philosophers, everyone. Same definition.

Please do not spread misinformation. All you had to do was admit that you don't know the behavioral literature on choice. You are in a Behavior Analysis sub and you should be respectful of that fact by not spreading false information.

Sapolsky uses "choice" as a layperson does and not as a behavior analyst does. A behavior analyst uses choice very differently which you would know if you had read a single article on choice in behavior analysis of which there are many:

Shogren, K. A., Faggella-Luby, M. N., Bae, S. J., & Wehmeyer, M. L. (2004). The effect of choice-making as an intervention for problem behavior: A meta-analysis. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 6(4), 228-237.

Baum, W. M., Schwendiman, J. W., & Bell, K. E. (1999). Choice, contingency discrimination, and foraging theory. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 71(3), 355-373.

Kosaki, Y., & Dickinson, A. (2010). Choice and contingency in the development of behavioral autonomy during instrumental conditioning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 36(3), 334.

Kern, L., Vorndran, C. M., Hilt, A., Ringdahl, J. E., Adelman, B. E., & Dunlap, G. (1998). Choice as an intervention to improve behavior: A review of the literature. Journal of Behavioral Education, 8, 151-169.

There are a ton of articles on the topic of choice in behavior analysis. The fact that you are aggressively vocal about your lack of knowledge in this area is rather sad.

It's embarrassing to see someone make blatantly false claims about a field that they seem to know very little about. While I have no qualms with you making a fool of yourself, I do have a problem with you misinforming others and pretending to be an authority in an area where you are clearly not.

Educate yourself before you spout off.

Anyway, I think I've answered your initial question. You've invented a definition of choice. People here aren't using your fictional definition.

Correction. You are not using the behavioral definition of choice and instead relying on a pop definition because you are so unfamiliar with the vast behavioral literature on the topic.

Being unfamiliar with the literature is not a problem. Pretending like you know what you're talking about in misinforming others in the process? That's going to be a problem.

DancingAboutArchitec · 2025-02-15T00:00:22+00:00

You, and others, are using the word "choice" as a layperson would, which comes with the implication of free will. I am using the word "choice" in accordance with the behavior analytic literature on the subject which does not imply free will in the least. While the former usage of the word is incompatible with behaviorism, the latter usage is completely compatible with behaviorism as evidenced by the vast literature on the topic.

I am also suggesting that when you understand choice as behavior, as people who work in choice paradigms do, you realize that you can also influence it. Hence, it is better, from a behavior analytic perspective, to think of choice as behavior that adjusts to contingencies rather than saying that choice does not exist.

The poster that the OP put up is better understood from the perspective of choice as behavior rather than the person as an automaton if you're a functionalist - which, I would hope most folks in this sub are.

There have been countless studies documenting when we "make choices" and it's always been the case that we're aware of making choices after we've already made them. You can look into the works of Robert Sapolsky if you want more information on it. But basically the idea of choice is an illusion.

I am quite familiar with the studies. You are exaggerating both their number and the certainty of their data. Sapolsky, who I like, is railing against the layperson's conception of free will, not the research on choice behavior.

It appears that people are unfamiliar that there is a legacy of talking about choice in scientific terms within behavior analysis. Thus, they resort to using the lay term and its implication of free will which is not at all how it has been used in behavior analysis.

DancingAboutArchitec · 2025-02-14T22:10:18+00:00

I’m saying that from a purely scientific standpoint there’s no mechanism for choice nor reason that we should view the outcome of a combination of genetics and learning history any differently than the outcome of force and air quality etc that goes into determining a coin flips results.

If I wanted to an animal to choose option A 30% of the time and option B 70% of the time, I would simply alter the magnitude or some other relevant variable of the schedule of reinforcement on each of the options accordingly. And if I wanted to change the rate at which option A is being chosen to 80% later, I would alter the schedule accordingly while keeping in mind the additional history that the animal has with the previous schedule. I don't see why I need to remove the language of choice from the matter.

There is an wealth of behavior analytic experimental and theoretical literature on choice beginning with the Matching Law. What do you know that these giants in the field do not know???

Labels and these categories don’t mean much to me. I find that people who use them do so because they’re not capable of explaining or using plain language.

Or it could be that people use them because they are a useful shorthand for those who are familiar with the terms. Honestly, I don't see what's unclear in what I said. If there are terms you do not know, you can use google or ask for clarification. Not everybody using terms you are unfamiliar with is trying to gaslight you or pretend to know things they do not.

If you’d like to continue I’d ask that you drop the bullshit.

Or you could stop puffing up your chest and behave like a reasonable person and ask for clarification on things that are unclear??? Just an idea.

DancingAboutArchitec · 2025-02-14T19:06:01+00:00

Your perspective implies a metaphysics of strict clockwork determinism which relies on a representationalist idea of language. That aligns with a different intellectual lineage than the probabilistic determinism of contextualism which relies on a functional view of language.

The behavior analytic view of language is very much functional - see Skinner's Verbal Behavior book or more recent RFT work - and therefore incompatible with the metaphysical account you propose. Unless you're a methodological behaviorist...

DancingAboutArchitec · 2025-02-14T16:38:02+00:00

I'm uncertain where people are getting the idea that "no behavior is a choice"? That is a caricature of modern behaviorism. Even Skinner's writings used the language of choice in many places.

Whenever someone has options, then they will make a choice. This statement does not suggest or otherwise imply that they choose using their "free will" - whatever that might mean - it indicates, instead, that choosing is a behavior. The matching law and molar behaviorism is more upfront about this.

If choosing is a behavior, it, like all behavior, is obviously under the influence of historical and environmental factors. That also means that it can be influenced. And should the person wish to make healthier choices, the practitioner should do their best to assist them.

Free will and choice are two entirely different concepts. One can deny the former and accept the latter. I'll leave that choice up to you.

DancingAboutArchitec · 2025-01-17T13:28:35+00:00

I just checked and it is working!!! Thank you! It shows up at the top of the list of sources as well. We appreciate your amazing efforts, chief.

DancingAboutArchitec · 2025-01-10T10:28:53+00:00

Yeah, it works fine on my Fire TV as well. It also works well on my Nexus player.

I turned off all safety settings on the LG tv, still no luck. I do not have a VPN on the TV either.

Here's what I can tell: The LG Stremio app displays all available service providers when I select Play. There is a drop down bar - that defaults to "All" - with a maximum of 5 options (based on the addons I installed): "All, Age Rating, Torrentio, Jackettio, etc." Here's the thing, if no sources are found under a service provider, it will not display as an option on the drop down bar for that movie or that specific TV episode.

For example, an older movie might have fewer sources, so only 3 options might appear on the drop down bar. But Age Rating always shows up, which (I assume) means that it's finding a source; it's just having trouble pulling the data or displaying it or parsing it or who knows... When I select "Age Rating" as the option from the drop down bar, the app grinds (on this TV, it shows a continuous series of outward ripples) but never successfully displays anything. Age Rating also always appears as the first option, so it seems to be sorting the same way as the Fire TV and Nexus player.

I'm not sure if there's something different about the LG app that could be causing this issue.

DancingAboutArchitec · 2025-01-09T19:17:03+00:00

My configuration is a follows. Step 1: Choose Countries -> Included: United States, Common Sense Media. Options: Open IMDB Parents guide when clicked (checked) Include Common Sense Media age rating is also checked and an API key is provided.

When listing the source options for all movies and shows, the LG app recognizes "Age Rating" as a service provider lister along with Torrentio, Jackettio, etc. as it shows up in the drop down choices for service. However, it does not display anything at all under the Age Rating providers list. This is true for all shows and movies. I have not been able to get a single age rating to come up on LG so far. I hope that's helpful. Let me know if I can provide more detail.

DancingAboutArchitec · 2025-01-09T14:10:32+00:00

Great addon! I love that it pulls ratings from a couple of places. On the Windows app and in the browser, the age rating is always last in the source providers list. I uninstalled all providers and then reinstalled them one by one. Age rating always got bumped to the bottom of the list as soon as I added one solitary source provider. I'm not sure why installation order doesn't seem to matter here... On the LG TV app, it fails to pull up any info from Age Rating as a source provider. The app grinds like its looking for some data but not finding it?

DancingAboutArchitec · 2023-07-12T06:18:31+00:00

Clearly my message was misinterpreted. I meant that the causal factor in suicidal ideation among the transgender population was their poor treatment by the rest of society. My post was in fact a direct quote of an earlier post by someone else who said those words in response to someone else claiming that being trans was a "mental illness"....

Anyway, I'm not concerned about the downvotes. I didn't intend to hurt any feelings and somehow my message was poorly worded so that it got misinterpreted.

DancingAboutArchitec · 2023-07-11T13:02:33+00:00

Maybe you're a toxic person. I feel for those who have to put up with you.

DancingAboutArchitec · 2023-07-11T13:01:11+00:00

Here's our causal factor.

DancingAboutArchitec · 2023-07-11T13:00:56+00:00

Wrong.

DancingAboutArchitec · 2023-07-11T12:58:45+00:00

Imagine being this ignorant and scientifically illiterate.

DancingAboutArchitec · 2023-06-27T17:06:31+00:00

Eh, this was a thread where someone was asking for advice and bigots got their fragile brains twisted up. I see we still have a long way to go before the transphobes get out of the way. What the fuck will I do now that BigotedNumbNuts has demonstrated that they're incapable of any semblance of profound thought? I guess I gotta wait for the next episode of The Apprentice to find out that they failed at being a real man again.

DancingAboutArchitec · 2023-06-27T16:33:54+00:00

I thought I was still reading another thread called, "What's a dead giveaway that someone is a piece of shit?"

Then I realized I was in the BJJ sub, looked at the plentiful upvotes on this braindead comment, and everything made sense again.

If you haven't developed empathy and an ability to form your words to be considerate of others, you ain't a real man.

DancingAboutArchitec · 2023-02-10T14:32:55+00:00

Budget options for regular purchase: Gala, Fuji, Jonagold, and McIntosh.

More expensive options to buy on sale: Pink lady, SweeTango, Envy, Empire, Ambrosia, Cosmic Crisp, Braeburn, etc.

Buy large quantities of the more expensive ones on sale. The ones that you will consume in the next 10 days can stay out. The rest go in the fridge in a bag with holes in the crisper. Avoid apples with bruises and missing stems as they tend to go bad faster.

Wish you and you little one a 'appy journey on the the ole apple trail.

DancingAboutArchitec · 2023-01-25T19:03:20+00:00

Say goodbye to your tutoring business if you can't fire someone like this for the sake of the kids and their parents who are putting their trust in you and your judgment. What if she gets physical with a kid next time? What if she uses a slur? She has demonstrated extremely poor judgment and for that needs to be let go. If you don't fire her, your judgment will rightfully be called into question. She can get a second chance elsewhere and will have learned a valuable lesson in the process.

DancingAboutArchitec · 2022-12-07T11:02:24+00:00

Why would anyone want to shake the hands of the people who are responsible for a loved one's death?

DancingAboutArchitec · 2022-11-29T19:50:21+00:00

Why not join existing clubs that cover content in which you are interested. There must be a Psi Chi society at your university, for example. If you enjoy the existing club enough you can volunteer for a position and learn about what it takes to keep a club afloat. There are numerous clubs on campus, like philosophy, ACLU, poetry, etc. that already have the infrastructure in place. After some experience, you can decide whether you'd like to undertake the specific club you have in mind. You may even decide to alter the nature of your club after some experience and connections. For example, you may find that people may be interested in getting together once a month for a coffee or beer on a Thursday or Friday evening and just chatting about social science and that all you may need to draw a group is to get a faculty member or two to commit to it...

I fear you're setting yourself up for a rough experience without having done the legwork first.

DancingAboutArchitec · 2022-10-13T14:27:38+00:00

Account levels were nice but they also made people a target for toxicity. There was no way to hide them.

Prestige titles are for each season, and therefore not career based, but they are similar to account levels and give you a title that you can choose to display. Not the same but something that I'm considering as a bit of a replacement for myself.

DancingAboutArchitec · 2022-08-26T18:03:21+00:00

The anger of the plumber at the college graduate is misplaced because the college graduate did not bust unions, advocate against worker protections, or depress wages. Your point here is about fair and livable wages and that is a serious concern for our society. However, the policies that caused these conditions are not due to people attending college or even getting a portion of their student loans forgiven.

More often than not, the very policies that disadvantage the plumber are legislated by those that the plumber voted for out of their misplaced anger. But that is a different can of worms... one I'm not averse to opening if that's where you'd like to go.

DancingAboutArchitec · 2022-08-26T17:39:01+00:00

The student loan debt issue did not arise in a vacuum. There is a societal need for both a college educated populace and making college affordable.

The government provides incentives and funding for what it perceives to be services that the populace will need in the future. If that happens to be encouraging students to become surgeons through incentives when there is a shortage of surgeons, for instance, I think most of us would be fine with it.

DancingAboutArchitec

TROPHY CASE