Sign Up Now
Get instant access to over 1 million+ study documents
OR
Already registered? click here to login
By creating your account, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and student honor code.
¶ … agreed with the conclusions that were come to, whether people learned what and as they were expected to learn, whether there are problems in the study, whether the study could be done in a similar way, the real-world implications of the study and so forth. The article in question focuses on the methods and work of famous scientists Pavlov and Cajal. While some may disagree with the methods and motives of these two heroes of science, their accomplishments are not in question.
There are a few things in the article that are of concern, or at least a casual mention and then some analysis. One example would be Cajal's focus on guiding his disciples including the proper and adequate lines of research. This "guiding" can lead to an installation of bias and ingrained ideas that are not all that scientific. Indeed, there are some modern examples of "scientists" (quotes intended) that are obviously or probably coming up with their desired outcomes first and then doing research and/or they are manipulating data in improper way. Further, there seems to be an array of cliques that pressure others that go against the consensus as being "flat-earthers"...
However, Cajal does allay the concerns of the author of this report when it is mentioned that going against the wishes and directions of the school is perhaps the best course sometimes. Indeed, groupthink and using "science" (again, quotes intended) as a means to obtain power and such is less than ethical. Indeed, true science and attention to one's work is throwing one's self into one's work and letting the chips fall where they may when it comes to the outcomes. Of course, this does not mean that one cannot pose theories and make educated guesses ... far from it. Rather, science should be used to learn and expand our lives rather than as a means to regulate and control it and some politicians and corrupt scientists seem to have that ideal twisted ... assuming it is present at all. The words in the article about Golgi actively dismissing legitimate research is a less modern example of the above (Rozo & Rodriguez-Moreno, 2015).
If there is a conclusion that can be gleaned from the research, it would be the Cajal and Pavlov were in much the same field for at least some of their career (digestion et al.) and they came to much…
References
Rozo, J., & Rodriguez-Moreno, A. (2015). Santiago Ramon y Cajal and Ivan Petrovic Pavlov:
their parallel scientific lives, schools and Nobel prizes. - PubMed - NCBI.
Ncbi.nlm.nih.gov. Retrieved 8 October 2015, from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26082688
In this, Pavlov admits the difficulty of comparing human beings to animals, because of the sheer complexity of the former. This is particularly so, as mentioned above, in the case of dogs, as they are very simple animals as compared to human beings. Furthermore, a shortcoming in Pavlov's reasoning relates to the stimulus-response paradigm. Despite admitting to the complexity of the human mind, Pavlov nonetheless assumes the predominance of the
Ivan Pavlov and Classical ConditioningIvan Petrovich Pavlov was a Russian physiologist who became famous for his work in the field of behavioral psychology. In fact, Pavlov has become iconic in popular culture thanks to classic �Pavlov�s dog� experiment. The term �Pavlovian� has even entered into the lexicon of the West and indicates any time a person has what could be called an automatic, trained response to something�like expecting a stimulus
When a greater variety of representatives were present, the term zemskii sobor or assembly of the land was applied to the group. This group did not really have any political power as a legislative body. However, it was a way for Ivan's administration to gather support amongst a wide range of people.[25] Ivan felt that he needed the support of the people and of the church to accomplish his reforms. Consequently, one of his early
This was different from the Pavlovian theory since the rat's response was not a respondent behavior but an operant behavior. Skinner does not reject that the subjects learn the behavior. In Skinner's box, rats learn that pressing the bar gets them food. However, this is different from Pavlov's classical conditioning where the dog salivates for food by associating the stimuli (the bell, the sight of food, or the sound of
classical conditioning by Pavlov and its current use in treating anxiety The paper focuses on the development of classical conditioning being used, as suggested by Pavlov, in treating anxiety through using fear-induced techniques. The paper talks about the past experiments that were done on animals and human, those who were suffering from anxiety and those who weren't, and highlights how anxiety is treated through fear induced conditioning. Combination of neutral stimulus
For Pavlov, there was less an emphasis on constant, internal conflict and strife, and an even greater stress than Erikson upon the ability of the environment to shape behavior, and by shaping external behavior shape the psyche. Conflict did not occur within the individual, rather it was imposed upon the individual externally by a stimulus, positive or negative associations were given with that stimulus, and learning and development took