> From: "Nicholas Bollons" <NSB195@psy.soton.ac.uk>
> Date: Fri, 20 Oct 1995 15:14:24 GMT
>
> PREDICTABILITY AND THE BASIS OF LEARNING (CLASSICAL AND OPERANT
> CONDITIONING)
A couple of centuries ahead of Hume's Induction problem here, but never
mind: Since the question is about the reliability of what has happened
before, you can't say: It's reliable because it's been reliable before.
That's circular. That applies to predictions about behaviour too.
> WITHOUT BASIS ON PAST EVIDENCE THERE WOULD BE NO NEED FOR MEMORY
> AND WE WOULD ALL WALK AROUND IN A DAZE
Right you are, but that's still doesn't break out of the circle...
> SOMETIMES CANNOT EVEN PREDICT YOUR OWN ACTIONS ie " WHY DID I DO THAT "
Right, and that's bad news for free will...
> SO IF MATTER IS CONTINUALLY CHANGING, BUT NEVER DESTROYED, WHERE
> DOES THE PSYCHOKINETIC ENERGY GO AFTER IT HAS MOVED THE BALL?
What psychokinetic energy? Until further notice, it's just kinetic
energy, and there's no problem with that (any more than there is in the
case of a car or plane).
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue Feb 13 2001 - 16:24:13 GMT