Support NeoGAF

[PogiJones]

The human brain evolved to group things together, categorize, and make generalizations and assumptions.

We all do this every day, and it's extremely useful!
-If you're anxiously awaiting a letter from a loved one, and while you're looking out the window you see a dog walk by, you don't run outside to see if the dog has your mail. Why? Because dogs categorically don't deliver mail.
-If you're hiking and you see a snake on one path and a bunny rabbit on the other, and the paths are otherwise equal, you take the path with the bunny rabbit. Why? Because bunny rabbits are categorically less dangerous than snakes, despite one exception.
-If someone knocks at your door, you look in the peephole to see who it is. If you know them, you let them in. If they're a stranger, you proceed with caution. Why? Because strangers are categorically more dangerous than people you know. (The accuracy of this one's up for debate.)

However, as we've seen, this tendency to make generalizations about people can be misused and abused. It can lead to some atrocious things.

In short, categorizing, generalizing, and assuming is a very useful tool that can go very, very wrong. And even if it end in an atrocity, you might still be a dick for using it, contributing to a generalization that is false or unhelpful. Yes, that includes just posting a misused generalization in a forum.

So I made this handy-dandy flowchart! (CLICK FOR A LARGER VERSION)



Are you about to post something about atheists or theists? Go through the chart.
Are you about to condemn journalists or gamers? Go through the chart.
Are you about to say something snarky about Europeans, Americans, women, men, white people, black people, cops, robbers, politicians, the general population, GAF, or anything else? Go through the chart.

Remember, not all generalizations are bad, just as a hammer isn't bad. But each time you swing, you need to make sure you're doing it properly at the right target in a helpful way.

 

[FUME5]

Flowcharts suck.

 

[Camp Lo]

Flowcharts suck.

/thread

 

[ebullientprism]

People who make flowcharts are dorks.

/Living dangerously.

 

[Rest]

Flowcharts suck.

I can smell the fume5 of hatred.

 

[Bulbo Urethral Baggins]

Where's "Do you give a fuck?" on that chart?

 

[xbhaskarx]

Are you about to say something snarky about Europeans, Americans, women, men, white people, black people, cops, robbers, politicians, the general population, GAF, or anything else? Go through the chart.

Stealth #notallcops thread

 

[Sketchbag]

Stealth #notallcops thread

I know. It's conveniently so close to the middle as if he writing it going, "how many things can I name before cops?"

/s

 

[PogiJones]

Flowcharts suck.

Is your generalization that flowcharts suck statistically accurate?

If so, is there some utility to it in this situation, helping you judge this particular flowchart?

If so, is it more practical to use that generalization to dismiss this flowchart, or can you easily determine this flowchart's merits without the generalization?

If it's practical, is your expression that flowcharts suck more helpful to the world than it is hurtful to the world?

 

[YesNOnoNOYes]

Is this like Connotations and Denotations thing?

I will print this flowchart and put it up on wall .... under the other flowcharts I've been issued with at work. It'll fit in nicely.

I wonder if there's some one out there who is a flowchart connoisseur....

 

[John Kowalski]

#notallgeneralizations

 

[SwiftDeath]

#notallinfographics

 

[GrizzNKev]

You should make a flowchart for which pizza establishment should be used.

 

[FUME5]

Is your generalization that flowcharts suck statistically accurate?

If so, is there some utility to it in this situation, helping you judge this particular flowchart?

If so, is it more practical to use that generalization to dismiss this flowchart, or can you easily determine this flowchart's merits without the generalization?

If it's practical, is your expression that flowcharts suck more helpful to the world than it is hurtful to the world?

I was friends with a flowchart once, I thought there was an unbreakable bond of trust between us. Then I found it in bed with my girlfriend.

Years later, I would meet another flowchart. I told myself that to blame this flowchart for anothers wrongdoing wasn't right, and so we struck up a friendship. After a night of heavy drinking, I awoke to find that the flowchart had stolen my wallet and my car, and had spread shit all over my bathroom walls.

The world must know of the duplicitous nature of all flowcharts.

 

[WedgeX]

The human brain evolved to group things together, categorize, and make generalizations and assumptions.

Sounds like you could've used the following.

 

[Kazerei]

We all do this every day, and it's extremely useful!
-If you're anxiously awaiting a letter from a loved one, and while you're looking out the window you see a dog walk by, you don't run outside to see if the dog has your mail. Why? Because dogs categorically don't deliver mail.
-If you're hiking and you see a snake on one path and a bunny rabbit on the other, and the paths are otherwise equal, you take the path with the bunny rabbit. Why? Because bunny rabbits are categorically less dangerous than snakes, despite one exception.

D'aww, these examples are adorable :lol

 

[Johnny Cage In The Shower]

Sorry this is totally off topic but, OP a quick glance at your avvy, resembles SmokeyDave chilling with a lady

 

[Freaky Fred]

Sorry this is totally off topic but, OP a quick glance at your avvy, resembles SmokeyDave chilling with a lady

no

 

[Johnny Cage In The Shower]

 

[Plywood]

Is this irrefutable proof of something or does it just agree with my views?

Who cares! CONFIRMATION BIAS

df;gjkhb[iortuhjn]tiu]04hnh t h45p4hp

 

[Vyrance]

lol thats awesome

 

[PogiJones]

I was friends with a flowchart once, I thought there was an unbreakable bond of trust between us. Then I found it in bed with my girlfriend.

Years later, I would meet another flowchart. I toldmyself that to blame this flowchart for anothers wrongdoing wasn't right, and so we struck up a friendship. After a night of heavy drinking, I awoke to find that the flowchart had stolen my wallet and my car, and had spread shit all over my bathroom walls.

The world must know of the duplicitous nature of all flowcharts.

lol

This is super weird. Probably the most uncomfortable photoshop I've seen.

 

[Surface of Me]

You should make a flowchart for which pizza establishment should be used.

Do you want your pizza to be a reflection of your poor, miserable life where your free time is spent looking at flowcharts to decide what pizza to eat??--->Yes---->Papa Johns

 

[Cheesemeister]

So in general, don't use generalizations.

 

[Johnny Cage In The Shower]

lol

This is super weird. Probably the most uncomfortable photoshop I've seen.

Haha! sorry man, I can totally understand how uncomfortable it can be for you, especially if its your SO and you in the original photo. But I had to do it, to prove a point to that guy there.

 

[akachan ningen]

I made this handy one step flowchart:

thinking about making a generalization? > don't

 

[SeanR1221]

As a behavior analyst, your initial descriptions of why certain behaviors are occurring is making me want to pull my hair out.

 

[PogiJones]

As a behavior analyst, your initial descriptions of why certain behaviors are occurring is making me want to pull my hair out.

Let's hear it. I'm honestly interested. It's not like my OP is my bible or anything, I was just introducing the flowchart. So I'd be glad to hear what you have to say.

 

[SeanR1221]

Let's hear it. I'm honestly interested. It's not like my OP is my bible or anything, I was just introducing the flowchart. So I'd be glad to hear what you have to say.

I'm bored so why not.

The human brain evolved to group things together, categorize, and make generalizations and assumptions.

We all do this every day, and it's extremely useful!

-If you're anxiously awaiting a letter from a loved one, and while you're looking out the window you see a dog walk by, you don't run outside to see if the dog has your mail. Why? Because dogs categorically don't deliver mail.

-If you're hiking and you see a snake on one path and a bunny rabbit on the other, and the paths are otherwise equal, you take the path with the bunny rabbit. Why? Because bunny rabbits are categorically less dangerous than snakes.

-If someone knocks at your door, you look in the peephole to see who it is. If you know them, you let them in. If they're a stranger, you proceed with caution. Why? Because strangers are categorically more dangerous than people you know. (The accuracy of this one's up for debate.)

It's not about categories, it's about discrimination. So the dog is what's called a stimulus delta. It's not a signal for mail. A mail carrier would be a discriminative stimulus. He/she signals the availability for mail. But only in specific environmental contexts. If you saw your mail carrier at the grocery store you wouldn't ask them for your mail.

Same thing with the bunny. But once again it requires learning history. It doesn't have to do with categories. What if you're a snake handler?

Stranger one has too many variables to make a blanket call on. Have there been recent break ins in the neighborhood? Do you want to avoid being harassed? Maybe you're alone and would enjoy talking to someone.

Behavior is dictated by the environmental context along with prior learning expierences. And this doesn't even get into motivating operations

 

[PogiJones]

I'm bored so why not.



It's not about categories, it's about discrimination. So the dog is what's called a stimulus delta. It's not a signal for mail. A mail carrier would be a discriminative stimulus. He/she signals the availability for mail. But only in specific environmental contexts. If you saw your mail carrier at the grocery store you wouldn't ask them for your mail.

Same thing with the bunny. But once again it requires learning history. It doesn't have to do with categories. What if you're a snake handler?

Stranger one has too many variables to make a blanket call on. Have there been recent break ins in the neighborhood? Do you want to avoid being harassed? Maybe you're alone and would enjoy talking to someone.

Behavior is dictated by the environmental context along with prior learning expierences. And this doesn't even get into motivating operations

Categorization and discrimination go hand-in-hand. Now, I certainly don't know the jargon of behavioral science, but pretty much everything you said was a categorization. "A dog is a stimulus delta." That's putting the dog in a category named stimulus delta. "A mail carrier would be a discriminative stimulus." That's putting the mail carrier in a category named discriminative stimulus. And a snake handler knows which snakes he's supposed to handle this way or that way, even if he's never handled that particular snake before, because he's handled the species, and categorizes the species' behavior as x or y.

I don't think I ever suggested that the way we categorize things isn't influenced by our behavior, motives and environment, and isn't subject to change. And I don't think I suggested that prior learning experiences don't influence the categories we create.

My premise was a simple introduction, and nothing you said conflicts with my OP. Now, if something did conflict, again, I'm willing to hear it. But discrimination and categorization are closely tied, if not equivalent. You discriminate based on x, because x is y. y will be a category.

 

[Gordon Shumway]

Stealth #notallcops thread

lol..although, I think he DOES have a cop in the family!!!

Spoiler

 

[SeanR1221]

Categorization and discrimination go hand-in-hand. Now, I certainly don't know the jargon of behavioral science, but pretty much everything you said was a categorization. "A dog is a stimulus delta." That's putting the dog in a category named stimulus delta. "A mail carrier would be a discriminative stimulus." That's putting the mail carrier in a category named discriminative stimulus. And a snake handler knows which snakes he's supposed to handle this way or that way, even if he's never handled that particular snake before, because he's handled the species, and categorizes the species' behavior as x or y.

I don't think I ever suggested that the way we categorize things isn't influenced by our behavior, motives and environment, and isn't subject to change. And I don't think I suggested that prior learning experiences don't influence the categories we create.

My premise was a simple introduction, and nothing you said conflicts with my OP. Now, if something did conflict, again, I'm willing to hear it. But discrimination and categorization are closely tied, if not equivalent. You discriminate based on x, because x is y. y will be a category.

No.

A dog is categorized as an animal, and will always be categorized as an animal.

Discrimination =/= categorization and to say so shows your lack of understanding on how behavior works.

You don't "put a dog in a category called stimulus delta". In your example he was a stimulus delta.

Now imagine a dog trained to fetch your mail. Now he's a discriminative stimulus for mail. Now imagine someone who's been bit by a dog. The sight of a dog is a stimulus delta punishment, signaling you to stay away.

These are not categories. These are antecedents to behavior. there's a huge difference there.

Whats funny is you're generalizing my field.

 

[davepoobond]

do you have to submit a flowchart to get hired by buzzfeed

 

[jacksnap]

The human brain evolved to group things together,

[snip]

However, as we've seen, this tendency to make generalizations about people can be misused and abused. It can lead to some atrocious things.

My human brain just assumed you grouped the Holocaust and making a stupid point in an internet argument together, better consult the chart to see if I'm being irrational.

I'm sure doing that was helpful, practical, and for a net good though.

 

[BeatResetsTheWorld]

So in general, don't use generalizations.

I feel like you've learned nothing from the OP!

 

[PogiJones]

do you have to submit a flowchart to get hired by buzzfeed

I don't know. I'd appreciate you finding out, and then creating a flowchart of how to get hired by buzzfeed.

No.

A dog is categorized as an animal, and will always be categorized as an animal.

Discrimination =/= categorization and to say so shows your lack of understanding on how behavior works.

You don't "put a dog in a category called stimulus delta". In your example he was a stimulus delta.

Now imagine a dog trained to fetch your mail. Now he's a discriminative stimulus for mail. Now imagine someone who's been bit by a dog. The sight of a dog is a stimulus delta punishment, signaling you to stay away.

These are not categories. These are antecedents to behavior. there's a huge difference there.

Whats funny is you're generalizing my field.

It seems we have different definitions we're working from, mine being the everyman's definition, and yours the specified field jargon. Because everything you said, besides "these are not categories," fits within my definition of category.

So to clear things up, what's your definition of category and categorization? If we're going to argue semantics, let's get on the same page.

 

[GrizzNKev]

Do you want your pizza to be a reflection of your poor, miserable life where your free time is spent looking at flowcharts to decide what pizza to eat??--->Yes---->Papa Johns

This is perfect.

 

[SeanR1221]

It seems we have different definitions we're working from, mine being the everyman's definition, and yours the specified field jargon. Because everything you said, besides "these are not categories," fits within my definition of category.

So to clear things up, what's your definition of category and categorization? If we're going to argue semantics, let's get on the same page.

A category is a group sharing some kind of characteristic?

The most you could say is something like....all stimulus deltas are categorized as a signal that a particular reinforcement is not available.

But seriously, you're doing exactly what your flow chart says to avoid right now. It's kinda funny.

 

[PogiJones]

Do you want your pizza to be a reflection of your poor, miserable life where your free time is spent looking at flowcharts to decide what pizza to eat??--->Yes---->Papa Johns

I was about to indignantly say, "I love Papa Johns!" but then I realized I made a thread with a flowchart and fit pretty well in your category. So, well done.

 

[PogiJones]

A category is a group sharing some kind of characteristic?

The most you could say is something like....all stimulus deltas are categorized as a signal that a particular reinforcement is not available.

But seriously, you're doing exactly what your flow chart says to avoid right now. It's kinda funny.

I still don't get what you think is wrong, other than when you say "It's not a category." And then you proceed to give it a different name, which is itself a category.

And you keep saying I'm generalizing your field. I'm not. I'm trying to understand it. Yeah, I'm using layman's language since I don't know your field's jargon, but I'm not generalizing it in any way that's inaccurate, unhelpful, or harmful. I mean, it's helpful to me, and the only harm it seems to be doing is making you upset, and I'm still not sure why.

 

[Mokoi]

I assume you like making flowcharts op.

 

[Spring-Loaded]

Can other users post their own flow charts on this topic itt?

 

[PogiJones]

Can other users post their own flow charts on this topic itt?

Abso-freakin'-lutely.

 

[SeanR1221]

I still don't get what you think is wrong, other than when you say "It's not a category." And then you proceed to give it a different name, which is itself a category.

And you keep saying I'm generalizing your field. I'm not. I'm trying to understand it. Yeah, I'm using layman's language since I don't know your field's jargon, but I'm not generalizing it in any way that's inaccurate, unhelpful, or harmful. I mean, it's helpful to me, and the only harm it seems to be doing is making you upset, and I'm still not sure why.

It's inaccurate because it's the incorrect terminology.

It's unhelpful because it's spreading misinformation.

Sure, it's harmless.

Right now you're basically saying, "I'm trying to understand your field by incorrectly interpreting why behavior occurs but it's ok I'm a lay person but I'm trying to learn!"

Sounds like a generalization to me. Consult your flow chart.

 

[PogiJones]

It's inaccurate because it's the incorrect terminology.

It's unhelpful because it's spreading misinformation.

Sure, it's harmless.

Right now you're basically saying, "I'm trying to understand your field by incorrectly interpreting why behavior occurs but it's ok I'm a lay person but I'm trying to learn!"

Sounds like a generalization to me. Consult your flow chart.

Okay, tell me how "stimulus delta" is not a category. Is it not a name given to a group of things with a like property? How is that not a category? You keep saying it's not, but you don't provide any information that places it beyond the definition of category.

 

[kick51]

that feel of caring about stuff like argumentative soundness to facilitate understanding among the human race. help me remember OP, i forget.

 

[SeanR1221]

Okay, tell me how "stimulus delta" is not a category. Is it not a name given to a group of things with a like property? How is that not a category? You keep saying it's not, but you don't provide any information that places it beyond the definition of category.

Now you're contradicting yourself and ignoring what I wrote earlier.

 

[PogiJones]

Now you're contradicting yourself and ignoring what I wrote earlier.

Where's the contradiction? And I've read everything you wrote. The only thing I see in your posts that suggests "delta stimulus" is not a category is that you keep saying so. Even in this response, you didn't answer a very direct question. How can I have a conversation if you won't answer a simple question?

I'll ask it again: How is it not a category, besides you saying "it's not a category"? How does it not fit the definition of a category?

 

[SeanR1221]

Where's the contradiction? And I've read everything you wrote. The only thing I see in your posts that suggests "delta stimulus" is not a category is that you keep saying so. Even in this response, you didn't answer a very direct question. How can I have a conversation if you won't answer a simple question?

I'll ask it again: How is it not a category, besides you saying "it's not a category"? How does it not fit the definition of a category?

Well, if I have to go back and highlight it all for you...

I'm bored so why not.



It's not about categories, it's about discrimination. So the dog is what's called a stimulus delta. It's not a signal for mail. A mail carrier would be a discriminative stimulus. He/she signals the availability for mail. But only in specific environmental contexts. If you saw your mail carrier at the grocery store you wouldn't ask them for your mail.

Same thing with the bunny. But once again it requires learning history. It doesn't have to do with categories. What if you're a snake handler?

Stranger one has too many variables to make a blanket call on. Have there been recent break ins in the neighborhood? Do you want to avoid being harassed? Maybe you're alone and would enjoy talking to someone.

Behavior is dictated by the environmental context along with prior learning expierences. And this doesn't even get into motivating operations

So right off the bat I clarify for you it's discrimination, not categorization. Pretty simple

Categorization and discrimination go hand-in-hand. Now, I certainly don't know the jargon of behavioral science, but pretty much everything you said was a categorization. "A dog is a stimulus delta." That's putting the dog in a category named stimulus delta. "A mail carrier would be a discriminative stimulus." That's putting the mail carrier in a category named discriminative stimulus. And a snake handler knows which snakes he's supposed to handle this way or that way, even if he's never handled that particular snake before, because he's handled the species, and categorizes the species' behavior as x or y.

I don't think I ever suggested that the way we categorize things isn't influenced by our behavior, motives and environment, and isn't subject to change. And I don't think I suggested that prior learning experiences don't influence the categories we create.

My premise was a simple introduction, and nothing you said conflicts with my OP. Now, if something did conflict, again, I'm willing to hear it. But discrimination and categorization are closely tied, if not equivalent. You discriminate based on x, because x is y. y will be a category.

Wrong and wrong. Especially the second point. Here you're trying to say a dog is a stimulus delta in your scenario and thus would be in a stimulus delta category.

NO.

The dog being a stimulus delta is an antecedent to behavior. It should not be put in a "stimulus delta category" That quite literally makes no sense. The dog isn't stuck in some black hole where he is always a stimulus delta.

No.

A dog is categorized as an animal, and will always be categorized as an animal.

Discrimination =/= categorization and to say so shows your lack of understanding on how behavior works.

You don't "put a dog in a category called stimulus delta". In your example he was a stimulus delta.

Now imagine a dog trained to fetch your mail. Now he's a discriminative stimulus for mail. Now imagine someone who's been bit by a dog. The sight of a dog is a stimulus delta punishment, signaling you to stay away.

These are not categories. These are antecedents to behavior. there's a huge difference there.

Whats funny is you're generalizing my field.

Oh look, I addressed it here!

I don't know. I'd appreciate you finding out, and then creating a flowchart of how to get hired by buzzfeed.



It seems we have different definitions we're working from, mine being the everyman's definition, and yours the specified field jargon. Because everything you said, besides "these are not categories," fits within my definition of category.

So to clear things up, what's your definition of category and categorization? If we're going to argue semantics, let's get on the same page.

No, you're making a generalization of the field. You don't come in and say, "Hey your technical explanation of behavior is this!" Thats called generalizing, son

A category is a group sharing some kind of characteristic?

The most you could say is something like....all stimulus deltas are categorized as a signal that a particular reinforcement is not available.

But seriously, you're doing exactly what your flow chart says to avoid right now. It's kinda funny.

Check it. Heres the bone I threw you. I give you an example where the term stimulus delta could be categorized.

I still don't get what you think is wrong, other than when you say "It's not a category." And then you proceed to give it a different name, which is itself a category.

And you keep saying I'm generalizing your field. I'm not. I'm trying to understand it. Yeah, I'm using layman's language since I don't know your field's jargon, but I'm not generalizing it in any way that's inaccurate, unhelpful, or harmful. I mean, it's helpful to me, and the only harm it seems to be doing is making you upset, and I'm still not sure why.

I'm not upset. You seem to be the one who's upset that he's wrong and can't keep an open mind despite saying he will. Throwing your hands up and saying agree to disagree! Im a lay person! Is kinda funny to see.

Okay, tell me how "stimulus delta" is not a category. Is it not a name given to a group of things with a like property? How is that not a category? You keep saying it's not, but you don't provide any information that places it beyond the definition of category.

I'd say see above, but lemme copy paste for you.

"all stimulus deltas are categorized as a signal that a particular reinforcement is not available"

Now lets go back to what YOU said

"A dog is a stimulus delta." That's putting the dog in a category named stimulus delta

This is not a category. This is taking a dog in a very specific situation and saying that it fits into a category. It's not how it works. For mail he's a stimulus delta, which as I pointed out, isn't a guarantee if its a therapy dog trained to get your mail. Maybe for play he's a discriminative stimulus signaling play is available. Maybe for a bite victim its a stimulus delta punishment signaling stay away that dog might bight you. There are a near infinite other possibilities. Do you categorize things based on near infinite possibilities? Seems quite silly to do that. Strikes me as a....generalization.

 

[number47]

I always love the part in arguements where the person isn't wrong because of "different definitions"