Apr 16, 2020

Rewards and punishments

Rewards and punishment modify behavior. I knew that. Everyone knows that.
But what I didn’t realize is this: a stimulus is a reward or a positive reinforcer if it increases a behavior.
A stimulus is a punishment or a negative reinforcer if it decreases a behavior.
Those definitions are simple. Take a moment and decide whether they make sense.
Really.
They seem correct to me, but they lead to some counterintuitive conclusions.
Jim and Bob are having a nasty argument. Both are saying nasty things to one another. Jim’s nasty comments increase the frequency and intensity of Bob’s nasty comments back. So Jim’s nastiness is a positive reinforcer—a reward—since it produces more nasty behavior from Bob.
Bob suddenly stops arguing. He looks at Jim and says: “Why are we arguing? We’re friends. And he hugs Bob. Bob stops arguing and hugs back. Jim’s action was a negative reinforcer—a punishment(?) since it produced less of the hostile behavior.
What?
That seems backward. When you behave angrily toward someone who is behaving angrily to you, it’ a reward, that’s what the definition says. That’s barely comprehensible.
When you show affection to someone who’s behaving angrily to you, it’s a punishment. That’s what the definition says. That makes no sense.
It might help to call it “positive reinforcement,” not reward and “negative reinforcement,” not punishment. But the fact remains: anything that causes a behavior to increase is—by definition—a positive reinforcer. Anything that causes a behavior to decrease is—by definition—a negative reinforcer.
A baby is hungry and starts crying. You give it food. The crying stops. Was giving it food a reward for crying? Not according to the definition. Giving it food was a negative reinforcer because it stopped the crying.
You ignore it. The crying intensifies. So not giving it food was a positive reinforcer for crying.
Really?
An older child is upset about something and starts having a tantrum. You ignore it. The tantrum continues. So ignoring a child’s tantrum is a reward, since it maintains and increases the behavior.
A writer writes something. Sometimes he posts it and sometimes he doesn’t. What rewards the writer for posting so that he does more? What punishes the writer for posting, so that he does less? What rewards and punishes him for not posting? How can the writer change his system of rewards and punishments to get more of what he wants?
In the case of this writer, the rewards are infrequent and inconsistent.
I like writing, and making words appear is rewarding by itself. But there must be behaviors that lead from written words to published posts whose rewards and punishments lead away from the behavior that I want to increase.
Here’s how the process might unfold:
  1. Decide that the piece is done enough
  2. Check grammar and polish
  3. Find links and references
  4. Find images (when needed)
  5. Copy/paste into blogger
  6. Press Publish
  7. Celebrate success
If I decide that a piece of writing is done enough, it means that the fun part—writing—is over, and I have nothing ahead of me but the tedious steps required to publish. If I don’t declare it as finished, I’m rewarding myself, so of course, I keep writing and revising forever. That’s where the reward lies.
Conversely, every time I write a draft and start to publish it, I’m punishing myself. The hoped-for reward of being done may be enough to carry me through to completion, but the more I punish myself for trying to publish, and the more I reward myself for giving up, the more I get of the behavior that I don’t want.
The remedy is to fix the reward structure.
I need to reward myself a lot more for publishing. Daniel recommended victory laps, and I’ve done a few, but inconsistently. I need to reward myself with victory laps and to make sure I keep rewarding myself that way, and I need to reward myself for rewarding myself!
I need to celebrate declaring a post “good enough.”
Instead of moving immediately into the tedious process of spell- and grammar-checking, I need to take a moment and take pleasure in having produced an acceptable draft.
And then I need to fill that tedious process with small rewards. Every step toward publication needs an appropriate celebration.
I’m drafting this as part of my Daily Pages. When I hit 750, that’s cause for celebration. When I start to edit it, that’s cause for celebration. And so on.
So here we are at 750. Yay! And on to grammar checking.

Apr 13, 2020

This was supposed to be posted in March and here it is April

“Why have I published only one post in March,” I asked the blank screen in front of me. Did I expect an answer? I sat and waited for one. I guess I did.
“You’re asking me?” appeared on the screen. “I’m a fucking blank screen. What do I know about why you can’t write?”
“How would he know what a blank screen would know about anything?” Was the response. “He’s never been a blank screen or even talked with one for that matter.”
“True,” I said. Or I thought was me that said it.
“It seems as though you often have to write a very stupid post about how you can’t write to start writing. I’m not an authority, though. It seems to be a pattern.”
“Dostoyoffsky and Tolstoy had similar problems,” someone or something added. “Afer they died, the taxidermists found that each had trunks full of notebooks in which they wrote stupid essays about how they could not write their novels.”
“Taxidermists?” I asked.
“Maybe it wasn’t taxidermists. Maybe it was the haberdashers. Or the upholsterers. Or something else.”
The Ambien was starting to take effect. I was yawning and making less sense than usual. Way less.
“I’m probably not going to finish this tonight,” I said to nobody in particular.
“Fine,” nobody in particular answered. “Go to sleep. Come back tomorrow. Minimal editing and publish it.”
I yawned again and went to sleep.
And when I woke up, it was April.
“Fuck!” I said. I better post this before May.
And I did.

The Mindful Photographic Moments channel

Let’s get back to first principles.
On February 26, 2016, Daniel created a hangouts channel for the two of us called “Mindful Photographic Moments.” With Daniel’s agreement, I invited Justin to join—though they had never met.
Daniel Feb 26, 2016, 4:00 PM
Mike - want to frame the purpose of the group? ☺
Mike Feb 26, 2016, 4:00 PM
It’s reminding each other to wake up and be mindful — through the medium of photography, or not. Theory is that we need to be re-minded.
Justin’s first contribution to the group was a perfectly Zen image of a nearly cloudless sky. Still one of the most memorable photos.
enter image description here
Daniel and Justin got to know one another:
Daniel Feb 26, 2016, 3:57 PM
You a photography guy as well Justin?
Justin Feb 26, 2016, 3:58 PM
I’m not, mostly just a hacker of things. IT guy But I’m in need of these waking moments…
Daniel Feb 26, 2016, 3:58 PM
In Maine?
Justin Feb 26, 2016, 3:58 PM
Yeah, find me a job out there would you?
Daniel Feb 26, 2016, 3:59 PM
I’m hiring. 😉
And hire he did.
Meanwhile, for nearly four years, with a few lapses, the three of us have been using the channel to wake ourselves and one another. And during that time, the three of us have come to be good and then better friends.
And we’ve become a micro-sangha.
The channel helped us stay mindful, sometimes really well, and sometimes not so much. From time to time, one of us would skip a day. More rarely, we’d all skip a day. Even more rarely, we’d skip more than one.
Like two days ago.
But generally, the channel seemed to work as intended.
Seemed.
AutoMike, my conditioned self, is tricky. He does a good imitation of a human being, and if I’m not paying attention to paying attention, I don’t pay attention. So more often than I’d like, AutoMike writes messages in the channel or responds to a message instead of me. It seems like I’m mindful. But I’m running on autopilot.
Recently that’s been happening more—both in the channel and IRL.
And today, I woke up and realized that on too many recent days, it’s been AutoMike all the way. So I decided to honor our years of success and rededicate myself to using the channel as intended.
So, I wrote this in the channel:
MQ is Mindfulness Quotient, a term I just (semi-mindfully) made up
MQ is the ratio (details to be worked out) between some measure of mindfulness per unit time and some measure of mindlessness
For example if I had no moments of mindfulness for a period of time (say a day) that would be an MQ of zero
And if I was “fully awake” for some period of time, that would be an MQ of maybe 100
That does not capture the idea that there are levels or intensities of awareness/mindfulness. So maybe not 100.
But that’s a detail. The purpose of the channel (for me) is to raise my MQ by reminding me (and you) to WAKE THE FUCK UP.
And I’m doubling down by writing this blog post. AutoMike writes some of my posts, but even my least mindfully written posts are written in a more mindful state than most of my daily activity.
So whoever is writing this (and right now it’s Mindful Mike (or Sorta Mindful Mike) is being more mindful than the recent average.
For a while, whenever I posted something in the channel or whenever someone else posted, I’d stop and take a long minute to become aware of myself and my surroundings and only then go back to whatever I had been doing before.
So I’m going to get back into that groove. And I hope my sangha will remind me to do that.
And I hope that my desire to set a good example for the rest of my sangha will also help.
And maybe I’ll take some time and read through some of the channel’s history. We’ve put some pretty funny and some pretty wise stuff in the channel and shared some nice photos, too.
Anyway, i need to finish my 750 and get this posted.
And then I need to get to sleep. It’s been a long day.

Pages