C-262.2. “Behavioral science”: a thoughtknot
The “black box,” a notion about what and how we think, is one of the things we have to show for deflating behavior BY and IN B-speak’s thoughtknot of “behavioral science.” As with “behavioral entity” and “expanding universe,” the adjectival treatment reduces behavior to a one-dimensional concept. A kind of science about behaviors.
Still an old-school kind of science … in that the interest is in this or that type of entity: each kind of entity has its own, so that we see multi-step entities the same way we see one-step entities – i.e., in B-ness terms. Thus, for one-step entities, identity and agency are the same (DIF) even though for multi-step entities, identity (DIF) is not the same as agency (DIF => DIF).
We need to apply the pragmatic precept: “behavioral science” =/= science of behavior. We have been doing “behaviors” research on this or that field of interest (e.g., chemical elements). We need to do research on behavior, of both the observer and the observed, both of which can and may change that behavior in their next step.*
The next molecular step. When and where Mind might and ought to do more … freed from the mind-binding B-ness, B-speak and One-ness procedural technologies that have deflated behavior.
Many have suffered and too many died for what they think. All of us have suffered and all of us may yet die for how we think. The curse of anthropogenesis? No. But it is a malady … a serious affliction brought on ourselves.** It’s suicidal.
***
* Hence the need for theory FOR and not just OF behavior. Given our place AT and ON the Expansion’s Frontier. Before the fact, not just after the fact. (See “The fact of life.”) Not just our place in the B-universe. A science of behavior, not just of behaviors, would position science of behavior (see KMmt) to advance toward a CEM relationship with procedural technology … replacing the fragmentary notion of ”science-based technology” and the historical evidence of technology sometimes leading “science” (see trains and planes).
** B-ness and B-speak are to blame. For their conceptual Mind-binding. Consider: “Deflated behavior is in consequence of behavioral deflation.” Which is to say that “body/step >1+++” is in consequence of deflation as one of many kinds of behaviors. Just as “behavioral science” is just another science – and science not -- like art, technology and architecture – another kind of behavior.
(c) 2023 R. F. Carter
Still an old-school kind of science … in that the interest is in this or that type of entity: each kind of entity has its own, so that we see multi-step entities the same way we see one-step entities – i.e., in B-ness terms. Thus, for one-step entities, identity and agency are the same (DIF) even though for multi-step entities, identity (DIF) is not the same as agency (DIF => DIF).
We need to apply the pragmatic precept: “behavioral science” =/= science of behavior. We have been doing “behaviors” research on this or that field of interest (e.g., chemical elements). We need to do research on behavior, of both the observer and the observed, both of which can and may change that behavior in their next step.*
The next molecular step. When and where Mind might and ought to do more … freed from the mind-binding B-ness, B-speak and One-ness procedural technologies that have deflated behavior.
Many have suffered and too many died for what they think. All of us have suffered and all of us may yet die for how we think. The curse of anthropogenesis? No. But it is a malady … a serious affliction brought on ourselves.** It’s suicidal.
* Hence the need for theory FOR and not just OF behavior. Given our place AT and ON the Expansion’s Frontier. Before the fact, not just after the fact. (See “The fact of life.”) Not just our place in the B-universe. A science of behavior, not just of behaviors, would position science of behavior (see KMmt) to advance toward a CEM relationship with procedural technology … replacing the fragmentary notion of ”science-based technology” and the historical evidence of technology sometimes leading “science” (see trains and planes).
** B-ness and B-speak are to blame. For their conceptual Mind-binding. Consider: “Deflated behavior is in consequence of behavioral deflation.” Which is to say that “body/step >1+++” is in consequence of deflation as one of many kinds of behaviors. Just as “behavioral science” is just another science – and science not -- like art, technology and architecture – another kind of behavior.
(c) 2023 R. F. Carter
S