"Glen M. Sizemore"  wrote 

> Well....that doesn't seem too troublesome. Basically, an operant is a unit
> of behavior that is defined by its consequence(s). 

Excellent observation.  Another way to put this is that 
operant behavior (which is synonymous with purposeful 
behavior) involves causation produced by one entity that 
produces effects in another entity.  Now we're getting 
somewhere.

> So, in the laboratory, a
> lever-press is defined by the closure of the microswitch mounted on it (the
> occurrence of the response can be made very probable by making some other
> consequence - like food delivery - contingent upon the closure of the
> microswitch). Catania extended this definition by describing the nominal and
> functional operant. When we reinforce some (or all) closures of the
> microswitch (the nominal operant), we find that switch closures increase in
> frequency, but we find that lever depressions that do not result in switch
> closures (the functional operant) do also. 

I'm very much in agreement with the mechanistic nature 
of your approach that is indicated here.

> In any event, operant behavior is
> "directed toward the future," even though its causes lay in
the past (as
> causes must).

Yes.  I use somewhat different terminology but I agree.  
We have to employ the future tense.

Putting it all together and along the same lines of 
what you stated above, I would say that purposefulness 
involves causation being produced by one entity, the 
purposeful entity, that will (future tense) produce 
effects in the effected entity.  Now the big question.  
What is different about the effected entity after it 
recieves the causation produced by the purposeful entity.  
And it's important to keep in mind that this has to be 
applicable to all entities that we consider to be 
purposeful.  In other words, the question is what is 
different about all effected entities after they are 
effected by the causation produced by their respective 
purposeful entities?  

When we answer this question we will have defined purpose.

(I should also mention, in order to achieve the most
scientifically accurate definition of purpose we have to 
employ relativistic rather than absolutistic notions of 
such things as what is or is not an entity, causation, etc.)

Jim
---
þ RIMEGate(tm)/RGXPost V1.14 at BBSWORLD * Info{at}bbsworld.com

---
 * RIMEGate(tm)V10.2áÿ* RelayNet(tm) NNTP Gateway * MoonDog BBS
 * RgateImp.MoonDog.BBS at 10/28/02 12:12:41 PM