You must log in or register to comment.
I mean, no joke, a dog whining/ begging is conditioning you.
I am a dog.
I beg. You give me food. I look cute.
I beg. You don’t give me food. I cry.
Next time I beg, will you give me the food?
Probably.
After that: I look cute. You give me food.
Congratulations, you’ve just been conditioned by your dog, buuuuut you get a cute dog, lmao.
I seem to remember reading that domesticated dogs evolved more expressive eyebrows that proved to be a survival advantage in this process.
Found the article: https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1820653116
That is super neat, you’re right! It was bread into them due to human preference.
It was bread into them
deleted by creator
Cunning disguises!
This reminds me of the silly iPad games my kid had me playing a decade ago.
I miss it. :(
Lmao, I’m not going to fix it.
Thanks, I just had a good laugh. ;)
Mmmh, puppy muffin.
I’ve seen a few things that have shown many animals have developed a sense of “cuteness” specifically to deal with us.
I’ve long had a theory that cats have evolved to be just cute enough that we don’t murder them. Cats are evil, so it’s understandable that humans would want to kill them, and I think we probably did early on, but some of them were so cute that we didn’t. Those surviving cute cats reproduced and made more cute cats, but they also became more evil. Over generations, we have created beings that are supremely evil, but they’re just so gosh darned cute that we let them get away with it.
Well that and they kill pests. We also like things that are useful. I just wish they wouldn’t put the dead pests in my shoe 😬
If you were a better hunter, they wouldn’t pity you and provide you food to eat.
Cats are an autonomous pest control system, that’s why they’re everywhere.
Cats don’t have any of the typical traits of domestication. Humans do.
Draw your own conclusions.
Yeah they evolved to keep much more baby-like features into adulthood with a big head and huge eyes because that’s cute to us and triggers strong instincts of protection and love. I forget the exact name for it. And my cats do be looking extremely cute all the time so it was very successful.
Too bad it’s not Pavlovian conditioning afaik
deleted by creator
Replace every instance of dog with cat and you’ve got the reason I give out treats at night before I start cleaning dishes.
The correct answer is
Fuck Pavlov
Motherfucker is like the Hitler of dogs. It’s a shame his name is remembered for the conditioning and not the mutilation. Dude was a monster.
Wait really? Ive never been told about this
Yeah, he cut holes in their throats so food would fall out and added additional holes along the digestive tract to collect various “gastric juices”. He also, apparently, started a business harvesting and selling said juices as a cure for indigestion… not sure how that worked, seems like it would cause more than it cured.
My god. We don’t deserve dogs if we are not adjusting Pavlov’s reputation for this.
Jfc, to what end? All this retroactive cancelling of dead people is just diddling yourself for feel-good reasons. Get over it and be different instead of waving some flag that says you are different.
Mate learning from history’s jackasses is how we move forward as a society. Cancelling? The fuck are we cancelling? You said it yourself, fucko is dead, cancelled by life, you don’t get much more “cancelled” than that.
Move forward as a society, that’s a good one. Please do tell how you’re going to change your ways now that you know someone famous did something heinous. Fuck all is going to happen, and all of this unearthing of our evil past to better ourselves is just a form of self delusion and shock value, typical for the outrage culture of these days.
The only reaction to this new found wisdom is “and then what”? And if you took two seconds to analyze the situation instead of getting on your high horse to start a new crusade you’d probably come to the same conclusion.
Cancelling? The fuck are we cancelling?
What is being implied here is that because he did something bad, all of a sudden that has to be mentioned every time he’s brought up. It’s completely pointless and just a testimony to how insecure we are as a society. It’s like having to cover up female ankles in case we get “urges”. It’s completely ridiculous.
This is the not how we move forward as a society, in fact it is a form of regression and infantility. An inability to hold two opposing ideas in our heads and instead throwing out the baby with the bath water because everyone constantly needs to reassure the person next to them how virtuous they are.
A progressive society does not need to retroactively change history, it can accept the imperfections of the past in the knowledge that we’ve already changed.
A progressive society does not need to retroactively change history, it can accept the imperfections of the past in the knowledge that we’ve already changed.
How is pointing out the heinous shit changing history? If anything, it’s accepting the imperfections of the past and acknowledging we have changed by calling out the callousness of its prior implementation and calling out what to avoid… you are literally contradicting yourself.
We move forward as a society by recognizing that jackasses in history participated in jackassery, and by learning that some of those jackasses were framed as “good” or “leaders” or “briliant” or whatever were, in reality, pretty fucked up individuals, so that we may understand our history isn’t as flawless and unbloody as we maybe learned as children.
For instance, I was taught throughout my childhood that Henry Ford was a revolutionary leader and the inventor of the automobile. Found it a bit odd that, later on, they moved the goalpost, so that instead of having invented the automobile, he invented the assembly line! He didn’t even do that.
In fact, Henry Ford was an antisemitic jackass that took the money he made by exploiting people at the right time with the right technology, and poured it into the stupid concept of a town in South America, exploiting/displacing natives to produce rubber. Something atleast The Deuce had the sense to dismantle, but only after decades of trying and failing.
Acknowledging the darkness in our history instead of pretending it’s not there is how we admit that we’ve done some fucked up shit as a species, and how we know we still have a long way to go, how we know there is yet work to be done, how we move forward as a species.
If you’d like a TL;DR, here you go:
Everyone needs their own Messiah. But sooner or later, he’s getting nailed up, and how you deal with that is a measure of your maturity.
Have a good day :)
Out of curiosity, what do you believe has had a larger negative impact on your life:
- Rando’s on the internet citing Pavlov being a dick? Or
- You wasting the time to rant about that for paragraphs?
Quit inhaling your own farts.
How about… both?
I get what you’re saying, but I personally don’t find it tiring. It’s just a part of contextualizing history. I think of it as a reminder of the progress we’ve made (I hope) - that we can put an asterisk beside someone’s name in the history books.
Kind of like how it’s impossible to talk about the history of hypothermia research without acknowledging its grossly unethical source.
Oh you mean actually learning from history to prevent repeating atrocities
How are you supposed to be different if no one ever tells you what was wrong the first time?
Well, thank you for letting us know. I read about Pavlov in textbooks in school, its better we dont whitewash his reputation! I learned the honest history in school about nazi medical experiments, I deserved to know about Pavlov too.
But the mutilation was part of the research I thought
I guess Piccolo was right to curse out Pavlov.
Such an existential question in so few words.
Or… it’s just an obvious “yes”…
There is a joke about that:
Pavlov is sitting in a bar enjoying his beer. The phone rings. Pavlov jumps up: “Damn! I forgot to feed the dogs!”
My dog trained me to get him water by lifting the toilet bowl lid. He doesn’t want to drink out of it, but he knows I’ll get up to stop him and check his water on the way. Now he’ll lift the lid then go stand by the water dish.
Alternatively: your dog has learned how to effectively communicate with you to ask for water.
Pavlov’s dog is not notable for showing that dogs could be conditioned (bell = food time)
What it did was show that a conditional response (bell = food time) could cause a reflexive response (saliva)
Classical conditioning is not the same as associative learning.
Pavlov’s dog is not about associating Thing A with Thing B - that didn’t need a russian scientist to prove.
I didn’t know that! Also apparently the Barenaked Ladies had it right when they wrote Brian Wilson:
It’s a matter of instinct
It’s a matter of conditioning and a matter of fact
You can call me Pavlov’s Dog
Ring a bell and I’ll salivate
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
Please Please Please Get a Life Foundation
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I’m open-source; check me out at GitHub.
What’s haunting about this question?
i suppose it’s that his intent was to train (essentially to control) something apart from himself, but he likely trained himself in the process (created something within himself that he did not control, at least for as long as the response was conditioned).
Assuming he was conditioned by the sound of the bell. Which might not be the case.
Your brain being altered without your consent/awareness?
Fuck, damn. 🤔
Pavlov Pavloved Pavlov
Image Transcription: Twitter Post
Jeremy Parish, probably, @gamespite
Out of nowhere, my nephew just asked, “Do you think Pavlov thought about feeding his dog every time he heard a bell ring?” and now I’m going to be haunted by this question
Deep
The mice will see you now.
