Fifty years ago in ETC.

Fifty years ago in ETC. We have often been asked the origin of the term"transactional" and why we use the word. We have borrowed theterm from Dewey and Bentley and we mean by it about the same thing thatDewey and Bentley do. They explain it in terms of the buyer-selleranalogy, pointing out that it is impossible to define the functionalnature of the buyer as buyer apart from his transaction with the seller,and that it is likewise impossible to define the seller as seller apartfrom the transactional nature of his relationship with the buyer.Similarly, we feel that the perceptual per��cep��tu��aladj.Of, based on, or involving perception. process can best be thought of asa transactional one. For example, such concepts as "organism"or "environment" seem to us to be static abstractions from atotal process and may be properly understood only if it is rememberedthat each of them involves at least to some degree all aspects of theprocess. Implicit in Adj. 1. implicit in - in the nature of something though not readily apparent; "shortcomings inherent in our approach"; "an underlying meaning"underlying, inherent this theory as briefly outlined is a rejection of theusual sort of interactional analysis. By the usual sort, I mean theinteractional analysis that implies independent entities with anorganism on one side and an objectively definable environment on theother, with some sort of interaction occurring between the two. Ourtheoretical view does not subscribe to Verb 1. subscribe to - receive or obtain regularly; "We take the Times every day"subscribe, takebuy, purchase - obtain by purchase; acquire by means of a financial transaction; "The family purchased a new car"; "The conglomerate acquired a new company"; such a bifurcated bi��fur��cate?v. bi��fur��cat��ed, bi��fur��cat��ing, bi��fur��catesv.tr.To divide into two parts or branches.v.intr.To separate into two parts or branches; fork.adj. universe. Also in this theory is a rejection of the usual cause-effectanalysis. We often slip into cause-effect analysis with its implicationsof independent entities and one-way relationships, but what we strivefor is what might be called "except-for" analysis."Except-for" analysis simply implies that we are trying toabstract those aspects of the total process "except-for" whichthe process itself would not occur as it does, and also, to the extentthat we are able, to specify the role that such abstracted variablesplay in the process. Suppose I set before you an object, for example, apencil, and you look at it and reach out and touch it. There is analmost perfect correspondence between your perception at one point intime, your action, and your perception at a subsequent point in time.But this tells us very little about the process of perceiving. Now, if Ileave the pencil where it is and leave you where you are, but alter justone factor, and you now perceive and reach for the pencil in other thanits true position, it seems fair to assume that the altered factor hasplayed a definite and perhaps determinable Liable to come to an end upon the happening of a certain contingency. Susceptible of being determined, found out, definitely decided upon, or settled. determinableadj. role in your perceiving.However, it does not seem reasonable to say that the altered factor"caused" you to see the pencil where you saw it; it is merelyone aspect which made a difference in a total process--an aspect exceptfor which your perceiving would not have been organized in the way thatit was. F.P. KILPATRICK, "PERCEPTION THEORY AND GENERALSEMANTICS gen��er��al semantics?n. (used with a sing. verb)A discipline developed by Alfred Korzybski that proposes to improve human behavioral responses through a more critical use of words and symbols. " It is possible to make a so-called electron gun A device that creates a fine beam of electrons that is focused on a phosphor screen in a CRT. with which a streamof electrons may be fired at a target. If we start with a comparativelycrude gun firing a coarse stream of electrons, we find the stream ofelectrons behaves much like a stream of water from a hose, so that wecannot hit with it a single sharp point of the target, but there is moreor less scattering scatteringIn physics, the change in direction of motion of a particle because of a collision with another particle. The collision can occur between two charged particles; it need not involve direct physical contact. . Now common sense might lead us to expect that ourmarksmanship MarksmanshipBuffalo Bill(1846–1917) famed sharpshooter in Wild West show. [Am. Hist.: Flexner, 67]Crotusson of Pan, companion to Muses; skilled in archery. [Gk. Myth. would become better as we refined the apparatus by makingit more and more delicate and capable of dealing with a finer and finerstream of electrons. Experiment shows, however, that our common-senseexpectations are entirely wrong, and that matters get worse instead ofbetter as we refine the apparatus. In the end, when we have, at greatpains, constructed a gun capable of firing single electrons, we findthat we have almost completely lost control of the situation. No twoshots ever come alike despite the best we can do, and we might as wellspin a roulette roulette(rlĕt`), game of chance popular in gambling casinos, and in a simplified form elsewhere. In gambling houses the roulette wheel is set in an oblong table. wheel to find what part of the target any electron willhit. The electron gun illustrates the general principle that, in themicroscopic domain, events cannot be made to repeat. The situation thusdisclosed is bad enough from the practical point of view, but I believethat it is even more upsetting from the conceptual point of view. Forthe one intellectual lesson that science has perhaps most insistently in��sis��tent?adj.1. Firm in asserting a demand or an opinion; unyielding.2. Demanding attention or a response: insistent hunger.3. underlined is that our mental machinery is capable of making mistakesand that we continually have to verify and check what we are doing. Thefundamental method of verification is repetition; the repeatableexperiment has come to occupy such a position that the very definitionof truth is often framed in terms of verification by repetition. Itlooks as though it does not mean anything in the quantum domain to askfor the truth about any specific event, yet how can I get along withoutthe concept of truth? You may try to extricate yourself from the dilemmaby saying that, although I may not verify the occurrence of some eventby repeating the experiment, I can verify it by getting confirmationfrom some other observer who has also witnessed it. But this,unfortunately, is not a way out, because here we encounter another ofthose baffling baf��fle?tr.v. baf��fled, baf��fling, baf��fles1. To frustrate or check (a person) as by confusing or perplexing; stymie.2. To impede the force or movement of.n.1. properties of the microscopic world, namely, that anelementary event In computer science an "atomic event" refers to an atomic operationIn probability theory, an elementary event or atomic event is a subset of a sample space that contains only one element. may be observed by only one observer. Confirmation bypublic report thus becomes impossible. To many, it might seem thatthereby science is made impossible, science sometimes being defined interms of publicity. However, if you are willing to grant that quantumtheory quantum theory,modern physical theory concerned with the emission and absorption of energy by matter and with the motion of material particles; the quantum theory and the theory of relativity together form the theoretical basis of modern physics. is part of science, you see that matters are at least not quiteas bad as this. Whatever the method by which eventually we getintellectual order into this situation, I think you can see that theobserver must play a quite different role in the quantum domain than inthe world of everyday life. All these considerations mean that the conventional forms ofthought are no longer applicable in the realm of the very small. I thinkyou will agree that my foregoing statement is justified, namely, thatthe failure of common sense disclosed by quantum theory is more drasticthan that disclosed by relativity theory. For, when in relativity theorywe go to very high velocities, we merely encounter properties of matterthat are strange to common experience, whereas when we go far enough inthe direction of the very small, quantum theory says that our forms ofthought fail, so that it is questionable whether we can properly thinkat all. One can imagine the consternation of our old philosophicalfriend Immanuel Kant who declared that space and time are necessaryforms of thought. What is the answer to the dilemma with which quantum theoryconfronts us, and where do the roots of the difficulty lie? Are we facedwith the necessity of devising new ways of thinking? It does seem to methat eventually we shall have to find better ways of thinking, but Isuspect that any improved method of thinking that we are capable ofdevising will eventually come up against essential limitations of somesort that will prevent its unlimited application. In the meantime Adv. 1. in the meantime - during the intervening time; "meanwhile I will not think about the problem"; "meantime he was attentive to his other interests"; "in the meantime the police were notified"meantime, meanwhile , noagreement can be discerned at present among the experts with regard tothe details of any way in which we might reform our thinking. As anexample, there is the irreconcilable schism schism,in religion: see heresy; Schism, Great. between the views ofEinstein and Bohr on quantum phenomena. Whatever the eventual solution,I think we can at least be sure that it will be outside the realm ofcommon sense. Furthermore, I believe the experts would at present agreethat whatever new way we devise to think about the microscopic universe,the meaning of our new concepts will have to be found back at the levelof the large-scale events of daily life, because this is the scale onwhich we live our lives, and it is we who are formulating the newconcepts. This recognition and agreement entails, I believe, aconsequence that is not commonly appreciated, namely, that the seeds andsources of the ineptness in��ept?adj.1. Not apt or fitting; inappropriate.2. a. Displaying a lack of judgment, sense, or reason; foolish: an inept remark.b. of our thinking in the microscopic range arealready contained in our present thinking in the large-scale region andshould have been capable of discovery by sufficiently acute analysis ofour ordinary common-sense thinking. P.W. BRIDGMAN, "SCIENCE AND COMMON SENSE" Since what the learner learns is derived from his own uniqueexperience and purpose, and his own interpretation of what impinges uponhim from his externality ExternalityA consequence of an economic activity that is experienced by unrelated third parties. An externality can be either positive or negative.Notes:Pollution emitted by a factory that spoils the surrounding environment and affects the health of nearby residents is , he creates a world of his own "<B>A World of His Own</B>" is an episode of the American television anthology series <em>The Twilight Zone</em>. <H2>Details</H2>*Episode number: 36*Season: 1*Original air date: July 1, 1960*Writer: Richard Matheson*Director: Ralph Nelson , which is notheld in common with anyone else. Each individual is therefore the centerof his own unique universe. He can share this universe with othersthrough communication, but only in part; because those with whom heattempts to communicate must interpret what he offers in accordance withthe receiver's own unique background. We have long sought to makepeople alike by requiring them to learn the same things. We can now seethat, instead of making people more alike by this attempt, we have, inthe degree that we have succeeded, made them more different. Learning,because experience is uniquely interpreted, increases dissimilarity.Learning promotes uniqueness, rather than diminishing it. One's perceptions are, of course, not unrelated to one'sexternality. The perceptive per��cep��tiveadj.1. Of or relating to perception.2. Having the ability to perceive.3. Keenly discerning.per chain of events is started from things orpeople in one's surroundings. Few people have perceptionsindependent of whatever starts the stimuli. It is possible, however, forone to reject his whole externality and build a new one more to hisliking. This is a common occurrence when people who are too pressed bylife become psychotic psychotic/psy��chot��ic/ (si-kot��ik)1. pertaining to, characterized by, or caused by psychosis.2. a person exhibiting psychosis.psy��chot��icadj. . If our perceptions did not come from us, thiswould not be possible. The most important thing in anyone's externality is otherpeople. To be sure, we need desirable physical surroundings in order tosustain ourselves, and to provide comfort and esthetic es��thet��icadj.Variant of aesthetic. satisfactions.But it is other people who provide what we need for the development ofour psychological selves. The individual helps to build those who buildhim. This is not a transaction, because it is an automatic mutualexchange rather than a give-and-take, but "transaction" seemsto be the best word available to describe what occurs. Since we build and are ourselves built by other people, we can seehow great is our stake in them. The psychological function is developedwith people, and the quality of the psychological self depends upon thequality of the people out of which it is built. This helps to explainwhy it is that children who grow in rich human environments--grow upwith "good" people from the human point of view--become moreadequate and more intelligent than those who are deprived of good humanenvironments. Conversely con��verse?1?intr.v. con��versed, con��vers��ing, con��vers��es1. To engage in a spoken exchange of thoughts, ideas, or feelings; talk. See Synonyms at speak.2. , we can see why it is that children who grow upin starved starve?v. starved, starv��ing, starvesv.intr.1. To suffer or die from extreme or prolonged lack of food.2. Informal To be hungry.3. To suffer from deprivation. human environments are themselves starved and inadequate, andthis shows up in, the form of low intelligence, resulting, in somecases, in anti-social behavior. Dullness is more an achievement than agift, since starved environments tend to produce it. A rich or poorhuman environment has little to do with economics. Some of our moststarved young grow up in rich economic situations. The way in which the psychological self is built shows why no humanbeing can become anything that we would call human without other humans.It gives the basis for the human need, or social need. This need wasrecognized long before it was possible to explain it. People who haveother humans to relate to become more human. Those who work in isolationgrow in diverse and sometimes grotesque grotesqueIn architecture and decorative art, a mural or sculptural decoration combining animal, human, and plant forms. The word derives from the Italian grottesco, in reference to the grottolike underground rooms (grotte) where such ornaments were found during the ways. Good human relations human relationsnpl → relaciones fpl humanas,concerning which so much has been said and written, are not justsomething nice to have. They are an imperative for the development ofpeople. This answers again for us the ancient query, "Am I mybrother's keeper Brother's Keeper was a band from Erie, Pennsylvania.Formed in 1994 by members of a number of other local bands, they became the backbone of the Erie hardcore scene. Alongside bands like xDisciplex A.D. ?" We see now that if we are not ourbrother's keeper, it behooves us to become so, for he is the stuffout of which we are built, and our quality depends upon his. The fact that our perceptions come from us, not from oursurroundings, is a reversal of long-held beliefs. In fact, it turns theuniverse around, so that now the organism that receives the stimulusbecomes all-important in what results. It has implications not only foreducation but for every aspect of life. We teachers too often act asthough we were starting fresh with the learner, and as though all wehave to do is tell him what we want him to know. How shall we tell alearner what a Russian is, or a capitalist, a labor leader, a Negro? Itall depends on where he has been, what special brand of prejudice heharbors, what in the light of these pasts, he not only chooses to, butmust, make of these symbols. For a long time, it had been assumed that the organism thatreceived the stimuli was only a receiver, that the object from which thestimulus originated was all-important, and that the viewer had no choicebut to see it exactly as it was. If he did not see it as it was, then hewas blamed, condemned as stupid, and efforts were made to"correct" him. This placed the learner in a position ofunimportance and insignificance in��sig��nif��i��cance?n.The quality or state of being insignificant.Noun 1. insignificance - the quality of having little or no significanceunimportance - the quality of not being important or worthy of note . This is the assumption of theauthoritarian, and his basis for operation. In spite of our democraticform of government, it is the usual custom, in home, church and school,to assume that the child does not know and the adult does, and thattherefore he must be told, and, having been told, he will know. If hedoes not know after we have told him, then he must be coerced. Now it comes about that whatever we tell the learner, he will makesomething that is all his own out of it, and it will be different fromwhat we held so dear and attempted to "transmit." He willbuild it into his own scheme of things, and relate it uniquely to whathe already uniquely holds as experience. Thus he builds a world all hisown, and what is really important is what he makes of what we tell him,not what we intended. Since our perceptions come from us and each of us is the center ofa world all his own, we have a scientific basis for individualism individualismPolitical and social philosophy that emphasizes individual freedom. Modern individualism emerged in Britain with the ideas of Adam Smith and Jeremy Bentham, and the concept was described by Alexis de Tocqueville as fundamental to the American temper. andfor democracy. The authoritarian usually (not always) thinks and claimsthat he is promoting individualism. Actually he attempts to make peoplealike rather than different, and making people alike, if it werepossible, would appear to reduce individualism, not promote it. To besure, European fascists, Nazis and the Russian dictators have notpretended pre��tend��ed?adj.1. Not genuine or sincere; feigned: a pretended interest in the proceedings.2. Supposed; alleged: the pretended heir to the throne. to promote individualism, but the American "ruggedindividualist in��di��vid��u��al��ist?n.1. One that asserts individuality by independence of thought and action.2. An advocate of individualism.in " is often an authoritarian person who thinks he ispromoting individualism by making everybody just like him. So it is thatoften the rugged individualist inadvertently and effectually ef��fec��tu��al?adj.Producing or sufficient to produce a desired effect; fully adequate. See Synonyms at effective.[Middle English effectuel, from Old French, from Late Latin becomes theenemy of individualism. EARL C. KELLEY, "EDUCATION IS COMMUNICATION" EDITOR: NORA MILLER