Psycho-Babble Administration | about the operation of this site | Framed
This thread | Show all | Post follow-up | Start new thread | List of forums | Search | FAQ

Re: blocks, options, and prevention

Posted by Honore on July 2, 2007, at 12:12:43

In reply to Re: blocks, options, and prevention, posted by Dr. Bob on July 2, 2007, at 11:41:53

B = S * (D - P / r)

b= s * (D - (P/r) ) ?

In that case, if d= 48, P=147, and r=10, then the block is, as you said, 33 weeks. I'd be interested in seeing more of how Klavot's system works.

I don't mean to be personal, Bob, but I wonder if you aren't underestimating the degree of loss involved in being blocked from a place that you go to, and get some important emotional solace, for as long as two weeks or even a month.

Maybe your thinking on this has evolved, but you aren't aware of it, or maybe it hasn't evolved since earlier when using the internet a lot was considered addictive, and all that. Whereas now, the internet has clearly changed into a major source of connection for many people.

I also know, for me, not being able to post here for a month would be a really great sacrifice. Yet there are moments when one impulsively does things, and then is taken up short by what one has done.

If it's a question of giving people a chance to repeat an experience, so as to learn enough from the repetitions that it would actually help change behavior, allowing people to come back and make mistakes and being blocked more often would, for me, make the learning process more probable.

If I acted impulsively and were blocked for a month, it would be less likely that I'd learn anything--other than that I felt badly treated, and perhaps had to be very very careful, which also could lead to moments of rebellious impulsivity-- than if I were blocked several times for briefer periods, during which I felt I had chances to act differently each time.

[I get the sense that your concern is not taking short blocks seriously, but I think people generally do.]

To me, the system of blocks isn't really just. That's my personal feeling. I do think it's important to separate grammatical impulses from interpersonal impulses, so to speak. So that's just a disagreement on principles. I could argue, but it's probably just based on some fundamental beliefs.

I do think, though, from a practical point of view, or teaching new behaviors, allowing people more chances to make mistakes, suffer the consequences, and come back with another chance, would lead to people's feeling more consistency in their lives (ie participation) and also to have chances to adapt to the rules, which may not be natural, initially.





Post a new follow-up

Your message only Include above post

Notify the administrators

They will then review this post with the posting guidelines in mind.

To contact them about something other than this post, please use this form instead.


Start a new thread

Google www
Search options and examples
[amazon] for

This thread | Show all | Post follow-up | Start new thread | FAQ
Psycho-Babble Administration | Framed

poster:Honore thread:762973