I spent this morning studying pre-calculus tutorial videos<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.khanacademy.org_math_differential-2Dcalculus_dc-2Dlimits_dc-2Depsilon-2Ddelta_v_proving-2Da-2Dlimit-2Dusing-2Depsilon-2Ddelta-2Ddefinition-3Fmodal-3D1&d=DwIGaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=EB7806wg2hx7WsU5AVc2E30BdtyqeHdUCoV8GmiSQLs&s=MgKrkW7aHbeIvGw-njhi8nff7oyBENcQz4AiPy7deyY&e= >.
(How has your day been going? 😊 A family friend asked for my help with calculus homework.)

I am struck by how precisely defined the various terms and concepts are, and how uniformly these terms are used throughout the pre-calculus (and broader mathematical) community.
It has been noted here that Sapolsky and Henriques seem to differ substantially on the definition of “behavior”.
Would it be good (useful, possible) if Sapolsky and Henriques could (literally) “come to terms” with suitable definitions (e.g. of “behavior” and perhaps related more fundamental concepts)?
Would it be likely that these definitional agreements would be adopted more widely?
Is there anything like a standard dictionary (or glossary ) of (fundamental) terms used throughout the discipline?
(I am aware of the DSM and some of its critique.)

Calculus was developed late in the 1600’s and we have had several centuries to refine its description and how it is taught and used.
The terms used in pre-calculus are granular and approach fundamental (or atomic) concepts. The dependency hierarchy of the various terms is well defined.
Perhaps we have to wait a few more centuries for Psychology to attain that level of precision, or perhaps there is something that can be done now to accelerate this.

Respectfully and humbly,

Lee Beaumont

From: tree of knowledge system discussion <[log in to unmask]> On Behalf Of James Tyler Carpenter
Sent: Wednesday, February 17, 2021 10:06 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: TOK Robert Sapolsky and Sean Carroll on why we behave the way we do

CAUTION: This email originated from outside of JMU. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
________________________________
What something is depends on when, how, and the related languages. DEP is always both and as regards biology and phenomenal characteristics and resolves both too down and bottom up. It is both adaptive and dynamically how we and others measure it, regardless of how we measure it which is remarkably correlated if we think across correlated levels of systems.
Best regards,
Tyler

James Tyler Carpenter, PhD, FAACP
www.metispsych.com<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.metispsych.com&d=DwIGaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=EB7806wg2hx7WsU5AVc2E30BdtyqeHdUCoV8GmiSQLs&s=iprwmODcBqmqtSylBOB5yUHfsIcEEx-Wtc-NkbITxIo&e= >
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.experts.com_Expert-2DWitnesses_search-3Fkeyword-3DClinical-2520psychology-26keywordsearchtype-3DAll-2520Words-26category-3DClinical-2520forensic-2520-26categorysearchtype-3DAny-2520Word-26name-3DJames-2520tyler-2520carpenter-26namesearchtype-3DAll-2520Words-26company-3DMetis-26companysearchtype-3DAll-2520Words-26address-3D-2520-26addresssearchtype-3DAll-2520Words-26state-3DMA-26statesearchtype-3DAny-2520Word-26country-3DALL-2520-28or-2520Choose-2520a-2520Country-29-26countrysearchtype-3DAll-2520Words-26page-3D1-26freshsearch-3D1&d=DwIGaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=EB7806wg2hx7WsU5AVc2E30BdtyqeHdUCoV8GmiSQLs&s=K_CtLrD_UXRgYJoScAWZZ2nxuT_Owxi1CCVjaKnpHX4&e= 
________________________________
From: tree of knowledge system discussion <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> on behalf of Nicholas Lattanzio <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
Sent: Wednesday, February 17, 2021 9:32:10 AM
To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
Subject: Re: TOK Robert Sapolsky and Sean Carroll on why we behave the way we do

CAUTION: This email originated from outside of JMU. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
________________________________
Gregg, Lee,

I agree with Gregg that Sapolsky somewhat represents the problem of psychology in this podcast in that he is essentially just naming a bunch of studies and findings and associated neurology and using them as the basis for his reductivist materialistic claims; the findings he mentions are all good and fine as far as I'm arware of their methodlogies and such, but they are not a substitute for a holistic metaphysics. Now I don't believe in free will, and I struggle with what agency actually is, because it is there, but what it is I don't know, it could be multiple things, waaaay to vague a thing to be certain about.

That said, I really enjoyed listening to this podcast, in fact it speaks very much to the post I authored the other day on the Listserv on Trauma and Othering and Culture, and in terms of applied science, what Sapolsky offers is extremely valuable and explained in ways that the layperson can make effective use of, not much of an explanation of the nature of anything though outside of the still tangled mess of findings that we are still organizing regarding epigenetic neuroplasticity and just how powerful that might be in relation to generational changes in the structural makeup of genes and their culturally-imbued phenotypes.

Very interesting conversation, useful for sure and I appreciate you sharing this.


Regards,

Nicholas G. Lattanzio, Psy.D.


On Tue, Feb 16, 2021 at 4:35 PM Henriques, Gregg - henriqgx <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:

Thanks for sharing this, Lee.



I listened to the first 60 min or so on my walk. I liked it, but, at the same time, I found myself a bit frustrated with aspects. I use a different vocabulary. Indeed, the ToK System is very much about developing an updated descriptive metaphysical system that would avoid what I hear to be many confusions in the exchange. In this blog, I took Sapolsky to task for his excessively biological disease account of depression<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.psychologytoday.com_us_blog_theory-2Dknowledge_201704_how-2Dunderstand-2Ddepression&d=DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=SxOgCEbX99QYpQew3zLoM0VfJS9pNKiHUgBuNN_E53k&s=Dzr3_8wdY_UUZ7cOeTv5auITA2cdnQc7F2X4DiQDjrk&e=>.



I’ll give one example of a word I have a problem with, and that is “behave”. It comes largely from John Watson and represents one of the most confusing, taken for granted words in science. But that is a big error. The reason is that it confounds scientific epistemology (i.e., behavioral change can be observed and measured)  with ontology (i.e., there are very different kinds of behavior in nature). I can explain more if folks are interested, but to my way of thinking it results in Sapolsky making many confused statements. Heck, he doesn’t even believe we are “agents”. In my descriptive metaphysical system, that is what organisms, animals, and persons are…agents in the organism arena environment.



Best,
Gregg



From: tree of knowledge system discussion <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> On Behalf Of lee simplyquality.org<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__simplyquality.org&d=DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=SxOgCEbX99QYpQew3zLoM0VfJS9pNKiHUgBuNN_E53k&s=RvnY0sQm0-GcoU7XKRztFsNRupcnycT108uFTUv5QGo&e=>
Sent: Tuesday, February 16, 2021 8:45 AM
To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Subject: TOK Robert Sapolsky and Sean Carroll on why we behave the way we do



CAUTION: This email originated from outside of JMU. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

________________________________

TOK,



I thoroughly enjoyed hearing two of my favorite thinkers discuss why we behave the way we do, including free will and justification.

I hope you enjoy this podcast as much as I did.

See: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.preposterousuniverse.com_podcast_2021_02_15_134-2Drobert-2Dsapolsky-2Don-2Dwhy-2Dwe-2Dbehave-2Dthe-2Dway-2Dwe-2Ddo_&d=DwIGaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=EB7806wg2hx7WsU5AVc2E30BdtyqeHdUCoV8GmiSQLs&s=PHI-pFeg6jez6AaGor-HOwricUbjvkPhysppJ1ovn8Y&e= <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.preposterousuniverse.com_podcast_2021_02_15_134-2Drobert-2Dsapolsky-2Don-2Dwhy-2Dwe-2Dbehave-2Dthe-2Dway-2Dwe-2Ddo_&d=DwMFAg&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=PfvrUmcK3lQ1AqkOncOtpTCOBhhRNUAMHmma1OAbYFk&s=9xodwP6uJXOgIEKOV7RMU8BUX0CHY58jCiR9a-goY9g&e=>



Lee Beaumont

############################

To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to: mailto:[log in to unmask]<mailto:mailto:[log in to unmask]> or click the following link: http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
############################

To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to: mailto:[log in to unmask]<mailto:mailto:[log in to unmask]> or click the following link: http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
############################

To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to: mailto:[log in to unmask]<mailto:mailto:[log in to unmask]> or click the following link: http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
############################

To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to: mailto:[log in to unmask]<mailto:mailto:[log in to unmask]> or click the following link: http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1

############################

To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list:
write to: mailto:[log in to unmask]
or click the following link:
http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1