On the fundamental relationship of ABA to Justice

[Guest guest]

Hello?

Intermittent punishment, and reinforcement, by extension? ... as

applied to the law(s) (of justice) and upholding the law, thereof,

would better be understood, (as it is by some, if not only by me?)

perhaps, as something really " unjust, " of injustice itself, of our

conditioned if not social injustices, thereof, of unfair treatment to

Individuals of Individualism, thereof. The spirit of ABA? .. .

Pioneers to the behavior sciences, as assimilated today and practiced

by today's esteemed adherents, may have missed that, loop if not

leap, to the cognitive, mistakenly analyzed or inadvertently

projected of incomplete data, perhaps, to a better connection of The

facts, (of The truth, thereof?) that may have contributed to

negatively projecting behavior modification (behaviorism?) as

inherently unfair, (unethical, of conscience) by omission, whatever,

of its relationship, (of support) to and for intermittent punishment

and reinforcement. We're not accelerating as we should, where

training animals (rather successfully, I might add) has been around

for milennia, is my sense of it.

To intermittently apply punishment, and by extension, reinforcement,

correspondingly, is the fundamental problem associated

with " unfairness, " of injustice, itself, and the dynamic if not

destruction (destruction of mind, perhaps) that evolves " from " that.

Such conditioning as evolved to this point, upon further if not

deeper analysis, (feelings analysis) was primarily based on " fear, "

(of authority?) intermittent punishment (and reinforcement, corollary

to it) and who we used to be, thereof, (of politics? of war...) of

a/the " fear-based " dynamic of the jungle (survival of the

fittest/trashing of the weakest? What doesn't kill us makes us

stronger, if not fit in?) as opposed to reason, of " faith, " (?) of a

reason-based dynamic as towards the Individual, of the ecological,

civilization, and Justice of Understanding More, thereof, I Feel as

understand of that.

Our past was of injustice where not so much for the Individual of

Individualism, of what justice upholds. As definitive as that? As

definitive as that, perhaps.. .

Intermittent punishment (and reinforcement, somewhat) cannot be

reasonably justified towards the laws of understanding more (of

reason, of natural and logical consequences, of the cognitive, of

action/reaction of cause-and-effect, of The " truth, " thereof) of the

logical/bio-logical as it applies to Justice and More of All,

thereof. No more " that " than " over-punishment " and selective

applications of punishment and reward (of abuse, as by setting us as

an example?) to specific individuals can be construed as reasonable

to all that we can be.

Intermittent punishment, along with biased applications of reward and

punishment to specific individuals, of politics, and over-punishment,

where not entailed by those first two misdeeds? ... (of abuses?

abuses less of reason) should provide a sense of where we might

further our research towards greater " justice, " of understanding

more, towards education and all we aspire to achieve, thereof.

The connection has been made (by me, " not " so much of " authority "

between ABA and Justice, I more than hope by this, " exposure, "

of " Justice by Communication " and Reason, thereof

Our job is to me " more " reasonable, as relative to abuse, of the

past " and " the present. Where we are not, we are part of the

problem, relative to me, to me at the moment.. .

We can do better. (Oh, " so " much better, with " justice " in mind,

with what ABA is about and relative to.)

Mike,

I ABA

ABA for Understanding . More

For those who miss the future?

Intermittent punishment is the essence of injustice and abuse, and

not far behind that, intermittent reinforcement, as far as I'm

concerned, as postulated above. The laws of justice must be applied

fairly, as uniformly as possible, for the more intelligent mind(s)

(of Individuals) among us to come on side (out) and support

socialism, if not ABA, if not ourselves, thereof.

" Justice " for the Individual is that meaningful for what we are

trying to achieve with me.

Without greater (and greater) " justice, " as for the Individual, we

cannot practice ABA as we should, is my sense of it. But carry on

with what you have, if you must. You'd be better than most in that

respect, I'm pretty sure, but I won't teach my kids to fit into an

abusive world any more than I have to, and don't be too sure about

that, either? ...