The Ethics of Behavior Modification

" In 1971 Senator Ervin began an investigation into programs designed
to change people's behavior, such as psychosurgery, including prefrontal
lobotomy and electrical and chemical brain stimulation, as...

On Thu, 07 Aug 2008 11:43:44 +0100, TruthSlave wrote:

The ethics behind what is described here are extremes and, although
likewise important, happen to relatively few people, again not that this
makes it acceptable.

On the other hand, the advertising industry is essentially a behavior
modification industry. Immense amounts of time, money, research and
education have gone into making people do, usually buy, things. It is not
at all uncommon for ad agencies to employee PhD's in physiology who have
specialized, from university level, in mass persuasion.

The ethical license to do this is wrapped up in the increasingly hazy
philosophies of the 'free market system' and 'individual responsibility'.

A child of seven is as fair game as is an adult of forty.

However, both have something in common. They are both essentially
clueless by design. If they were not, all the effort and money and study
that goes into having them not realize what is largely responsible for
them to want some product or another is wasted.

On Aug 7, 4:58 am, ZerkonX X.net> wrote:

And, fortunately, lobotomy is no longer practiced
in this country. Cuba, I am told, is the lobotomy
capital of the world.

PhD's in physiology? How does that help in mass persuasion.
Perhaps you man psychology, which is considered a soft
science for a good reason.

The Ethics of Behavior Modification

" In 1971 Senator Ervin began an investigation into programs designed
to change people's behavior, such as psychosurgery, including prefrontal
lobotomy and electrical and chemical brain stimulation, as...

TruthSlave wrote:

Unfortunately that could look as though you have been hoisted up by your
own petard. Once we accept this employment of the term 'condition', then
we already tacitly accept that something needs to be done against people
who in our opinion display unacceptable behaviours.

Shrikeback@gmail.com wrote:

John Jones wrote:

The point here is that a connection is understood to exist between
behavior and conditions, or behavior and circumstance, and that one
needs to consider this connection to objectively evaluate behavior.

How many will see the importance of circumstance? For most circumstance
is limited to immediate observation, not background, or experience.

On Aug 7, 6:43 am, TruthSlave home.com> wrote:

(snip)

I'm not sure we're all on the same page:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethics

"Ethics is a major branch of philosophy, encompassing right conduct
and good life. It is significantly broader than the common conception
of analyzing right and wrong. A central aspect of ethics is "the good
life", the life worth living or life that is simply not satisfying,
which is held by many philosophers to be more important than moral
conduct."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Behavior_Modification

"Behavior modification is the use of empirically demonstrated behavior
change techniques to improve behavior, such as altering an
individual's behaviors and reactions to stimuli through positive and
negative reinforcement of adaptive behavior and/or the reduction of
maladaptive behavior through positive and negative punishment."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Behavior_Modification#Criticism

"Behavior modification is critiqued in person-centered
psychotherapeutic approaches such as Rogerian Counseling and Re-
evaluation Counseling.[5] The argument is that these methods involve
connecting with...

On Thu, 07 Aug 2008 11:51:38 -0700, Shrikeback wrote:

And for a not so good reason, you are correct.

Not the same. Speech, art etc. is willingly being open to reasoning or is
a willingness to be subjugated to another view. One goes to see, one
listens to another. What I am speaking of is persuasion without this
choice that attempts to by-pass the process of a willing choice.
So freedom of speech is not freedom to force another to hear. This is
called a violation of that 'freedom'.

On Thu, 07 Aug 2008 22:04:43 +0100, TruthSlave wrote:

Reasoned adaption comes first by knowing what exactly one is adapting to.
My point is that this knowledge is precisely what is hidden.

The end here, the actual thing or product being promoted, is secondary to
the persuasion process itself which is not confined to a thing or a
product but an entire way of behaving.