Hey y'all
I just wanted to tell you guys something that I think is funny.
Ever since the Greeks identified personality types based on humors (The
sanguine type, The choleric type, the phlegmatic temperament, the melancholy
temperament) a lot of personality theories stay with 4 major types such as
Adler, or the Myers Briggs--(SP)(SJ)(NT)(NF).
The funny part is Ivan Pavlov, of classical conditioning fame, used the
humors to describe his dogs’ personalities.
One of the things Pavlov tried with his dogs was conflicting conditioning --
ringing a bell that signaled food at the same time as another bell that
signaled the end of the meal. Some dogs took it well, and maintain their
cheerfulness. Some got angry and barked like crazy. Some just laid down and
fell asleep. And some whimpered and whined and seemed to have a nervous
breakdown.
The Greek humor theory doesn't hold up well especially because there is no
such thing as black bile that the melancholic type is supposed to have too
much of but Pavlov believed that he could account for these personality types
with two dimensions: overall level of arousal (called excitation) that the
dogs’ brains had available & the level of inhibition that their brains had
available. Lots of arousal, but good inhibition: sanguine. Lots of arousal,
but poor inhibition: choleric. Not much arousal, plus good inhibition:
phlegmatic. Not much arousal, plus poor inhibition: melancholy.
So I just thought that was funny and thought perhaps to how we respond to
opposing conditioning like this would be related to how we respond to
paraconsistent logic but of course on a much more complex level.
Although I could just be barking up the wrong tree,
Erin
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:01:52 BST