Bertvan wrote:
BV>TO (Wesley R. Elsberry)
CC>No. They exist as states and processes in the real world (in
CC>people's brains). They can even be *measured*.
BV>Please tell me more about these scientific methods capable of
BV>measuring hate and love in the human brain. :-)
WRE>Research is being done to provide methods to quantify affect.
WRE>One example that I know of is the research of W. Jackson Davis
WRE>at the University of California, Santa Cruz, who has been
WRE>working on quantifying affect in humans for some time now. By
WRE>combining facial electromyography with standard subject slides
WRE>used in psychology for self-report of affect, Davis has
WRE>obtained good correlation between sub-threshold activation of
WRE>facial musculature and self-report of affect. The pattern of
WRE>activation indicates categories of affect (e.g., happy, sad,
WRE>etc.) and the amplitude (or more precisely, the area within
WRE>the envelope of the bursts) gives information on degree. In
WRE>other words, Davis is able to both categorize and quantify
WRE>affective states in humans via facial electromyography.
BV>Hi Wesley. Possibly some scientists require electromyography
BV>to determine whether a person looks happy, sad, etc., but most
BV>of us have other (only partially understood) methods.
I made no claim that any scientists "require electromyography
to determine whether a person looks happy, sad, etc."
The topic stated in my first sentence is what I was addressing:
WRE>Research is being done to provide methods to quantify affect.
This doesn't say or imply anything like BerthaJane's response.
BV>However we read facial expressions, it is not entirely
BV>experience, for even infants can do it. "A good correlation"
BV>is pretty subjective.
No, correlation is a standard method of statistical inference.
BV>Scientific measurements such as gravity and the speed of
BV>light, are called laws of nature because of their
BV>consistency.
Davis' research shows consistency as well. The precision is
not yet as high as modern techniques for measuring g or c, but
probably compares favorably with the precision of early
techniques used for each of those.
BV>All actors, and most of the rest of us, could fool
BV>electromyography (by an act of free will).
This is a statement made in ignorance of the technique in
use by Davis, which examines *sub-threshold* activity.
BV>I doubt such a "scientific measurement" would be admissible
BV>as evidence in court.
Well, I doubt that BerthaJane has any basis to render such a
judgment on either legal or scientific grounds. But that's a
secondary issue. Let me return to something more primary.
What relevance does legal admissibility have to my topic? Let
me post it again:
Research is being done to provide methods to quantify affect.
BV>"A good correlation" resembles the type of "scientific"
BV>evidence offered for Darwinism, which is why some people
BV>are skeptical of it.
Correlation demonstrates the existence of a relationship.
While someone may dismiss any correlation based solely upon
how conveniently it fits his or her preconceptions, others are
likely to consider the merits.
BV>Furthermore, it was love and hate that Chris claimed could
BV>be measured in the brain, which are much more complex than
BV>"happy" or "sad".
And Chris can provide details for those if he wishes.
What I'm pointing out is that scientific inquiry is inclusive
of affect, and there are successful approaches to putting this
on a quantitative basis. Affect is related to the states of
"love" and "hate", I think most would agree.
Earlier, BerthaJane said:
BV>Choice, free will, spontaneity, creativity, consciousness
BV>and emotions were probably all necessary new ingredients.
BV>They seem to distinguish life from non life. (You'll never
BV>find any of them in a computer.)
There are a variety of researchers who would also disagree on
this statement. The volume, "Motivation, Emotion, and Goal
Direction in Artificial Neural Networks" (Levine and Leven,
editors) is available from Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, and
will serve well as a starting point for further research.
Wesley
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Dec 21 2000 - 09:55:14 EST