= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
NancyLebovitz comments on The Power of Reinforcement - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (467)
I seem to have more sympathy for your point of view than most here, but I'm not sure I have the thing articulated.
I think a piece of it is that a kiss given in order to get a spouse to do a routine chore seems very different from a kiss given out of affection or lust.
Intuitively, a kiss given out of enthusiasm for help received seems like a different sort of thing than a kiss given as part of a program to get behavioral change.
I agree. That said, this is similar to saying that me going to work because they pay me is a different sort of thing than me going to work because I enjoy my job. In practice, the lines between expressions of enthusiasm and attempts to manage behavior are rarely that clearcut.
From a different context
Would it be different and less risky if the reward were M&Ms rather than kisses? If both partners were using reinforcement schemes on each other? The latter seems to have some comic potential, but in a way that isn't quite coming into focus.
Do diabetes, arteriosclerosis and dental costs count as 'risks'?
I assume we're talking about something like a dozen M&Ms/day, which wouldn't be a large risk for most people (I agree they'd be a bad idea for diabetics). Unless the person otherwise would eat no sweets at all, I can't see the M&Ms making a difference.
EY must be saying lots of nice things if that's a non-negligible risk.