Herman Paul (1846-1921) devotes only very little space to language capacity in his “Prinzipien der Sprachgeschichte,” written in 1880. His formulation is of interest in that he considers language “a product of human culture…(but…the psychological element is the most important factor in all changes of culture…psychology…the principal basis of all…sciences dealing with culture” [98]. For a psychology he utilized Steinthal’s work.
Herman Paul (1846-1921)在其寫於1880的“Prinzipien der Sprachgeschichte,”一書中，只用了很少的篇幅來探討語言能力。他的構想有趣，這在於他認為語言是”人類文化的一項產物…(但是…心理成分在所有文化的改變之中是最重要的因素…心理學…是所有處理文化的科學的…主要基礎。The study of cultures flourished with the development of anthropology. Linguists had advanced beyond the early nineteenth century philologists’ preoccupation with grammars and dictionaries, and had directed their attention to spoken language as the expression of a society or culture [99]. 24 In this task they had the aid of anthropologists who shared their interest in languages. This development served to reinforce the tendency to consider linguistics as a social science, and concern with the psychological and biological basis of language receded into the background. Linguists may have welcomed this development, for concern with the biological basis of language might have meant a return to the fruitless arguments about language origin which they just overcome.對於文化的研究隨著人類學的發展而興盛。語言學家的進展已超越了十九世紀早期語文學家對語法和字典的熱愛，而已將他們的注意力放在作為文化或社會的表達的口說語言[99] 24 在此項任務中，他們擁有來自人類學家的幫助，人類學家也和語言學家一樣對語言有興趣。這樣的發展促使了把語言學看作一個社會科學的傾向，而對於語言心理和生物基礎的關注退居二線。語言學家也許會樂見這樣的發展，因為對於語言生物基礎的關注可能意指著回到有關語言起源沒有結果的爭論，而這正是他們剛跨越的。That the return to metaphysical arguments would not be essential was demonstrated by Wilhelm Wundt (1832-1900) in his “Grundzeuge der Physiologischen Psychologie” published in 1873. He proposed a scientific approach in which “Psychological psychology would examine the internal and external condition under which language, as the highest form of expression of human life, comes about. Comparative linguistics and Voelkerpsychology would describe the laws of subsequent development of language, and its influence on the thinking of the individual and of society” [100].
Wilhelm Wundt (1832-1900)在他出版於1873的“Grundzeuge der Physiologischen Psychologie”一書中指出，回歸形上學的爭論不會是最要緊的事。他提出了一個科學方法，在這個方法中:生理心理學會檢視一些內部和外部條件，在這些條件下，作為人類生活中最高的表達形式的語言，誕生了。比較語言學家和民族心理學會描述語言後續發展的法則，以及語言對於個人和社會思維的影響。
But for some time to come, the psychology which Wundt helped to found was not able to approach the task proposed by him. Physiology was in its beginnings and, as Kussmaul had pointed out, its methods were still uncertain. Freud had shown that most of language physiology had been the translation of introspective psychology into physiological terms. Language capacity was of little interest to linguistics at the end of the nineteenth century. The subsequent development of psychology, physiology, and linguistics belongs to the twentieth century and extends into our own time. With great progress in all three fields, which has led to new concepts, methods, and findings, the scientific examination of the biological basis of language appears to be a challenging necessity.然而在後來的某個時期，Wundt所協助建立的心理學無法處理他所提出的任務。如同Kussmaul指出，心理學當時仍處於其開端，其方法尚未確立。Freud已指出語言生理學的大部分是把內省心理學以生理學術語翻譯而來。在十九世紀末，語言能力不太能引起語言學家的興趣。心理學、生理學和語言學的後續發展是發生在二十世紀，並且持續到我們的時代。隨著這三個領域的重大進展，新的概念、方法和發現被引進，對於語言生物基礎做科學的檢視成了一項具挑戰性的必然。
2009年1月24日 星期六
LB462T伊津
LB462T伊津
It comes about after reflexive body movements and entered man's consciousness, and after the association of perceptions with sounds. Language had not been adequatedly understood in the past, because it had been regarded solely as means of communication. It had been incorrectly assumed that man had images, thoughts and the additional ability to express these in terms of sounds. Images and thoughts were themselves based on language.在過去我們並未完全了解語言，認為語言只是用來溝通之工具。過去錯誤的觀念認為人類需要附加的能力，例如意像能力、想考能力等等才能夠用聲音表達。然而，意象與思想能力是以語言為基礎。“We see now…how everything man attains at a higher level than animal consciousness and intuitions, is gained by way of language…Language is self-awareness, that is, understanding oneself… as one is understood by another. One understand oneself: that is the beginning of language”[92].Steinthal’s work had a profound influence on the well-known internist and professor of medicine in Strasbourg, Adolf Kussmaul(1822-1902) who devoted the first fifteen chapters of his book ”On the Pathology of Language,” to define and describe languages as such. “Language may refer to the physical –mental act of the expression of thoughts, or to that which is expressed. To attempt the understanding of language as an act of expression, is the task of physiology and psychology. ”
「我們現在了解了….人類的直覺與意識之所以可以高於其他動物，是來自於語言….語言是自覺性的，也就是說，了解自己就像是一個人被其他人所了解一樣。一個人能夠了解自己的意義是：語言的起源(註解92)」
Steinthal的作品對Adolf Kussmaul的影響很大。Adolf Kussmaul是一個著名的內科醫師也是斯特拉斯堡(法國東北部城市)的一個醫學教授。其著作的前十五個章節都在談「語言的病理學」，他把語言定義為：「語言可視為身體和心理的表達思想行為，或者視為所表達出來的東西。」將語言了解成為一種表達，是心理學和生理學共同的議題。His description of the development of language in children is remarkably perceptive: Children are born with a sense of language, an irresistible drive to express themselves. The babbling of infants is a spontaneous reflex activity, as are the uncoordinated movements of their limbs. As the child grows, it begins to listen, to differentiate sounds and to imitate words.
他對於兒童的語言習得有很前瞻性的觀點：「兒童生下來便具有語感，不可抗拒的機制促使他們表達自我。嬰兒時期的兒語是自發性的反射動作，就如同他們雙腳搖搖晃晃的學習走路一樣。小孩長大後，便開始聆聽不同的語音並模仿發音。」
This is not a simple process, some words the child understands without imitating them, others it imitates without understanding their meaning. In general terms, language development shows a gradual replacement of “the natural language of the child”(babbling), by the traditional language of the nation. As this is accomplished, language is removed from the spontaneous sphere and comes under the rule of will and habits.
這並不是一個簡單的過程，有些字小孩子可以理解但並不模仿它們，有些字小孩子雖然不了解其語意卻會模仿其發音。大致上來說，語言的發展顯現出了自然的語言(兒語)漸漸的被國家的傳統語言取代。一但這個過程完成後，語言從自發性變成習慣性且表達思考的規則。
Full development of language is equivalent to expression of (conceptualized) thoughts. Once this as occurred, the child has acquired the ability to elaborate the object images connected with words into concepts [93].Language poses a difficult problem in that it develops “without consciousness or purpose, although (later) we speak consciously and purposefully.” This need not surprise us, for most neural and mental activity is predominantly unconscious.
完整的語言發展相當於概念化的思想表達。一但語言完整發展，小孩便有能力將指稱的東西與字和概念連結。語言存在一個問題，因為語言的發展是不自覺且無目的的，雖然我們後來在說話時是自覺的且有目的的。但是並不需要對這個感到驚訝，因為許多神經與心理活都都是不自覺下產生的。
Kussmaul thought that it would be premature to discuss language in purely physiological terms, as long as physiology was just beginning to decide on its experimental methods. It would be just as impossible to ascribe the complex function of language to simple speech center as to define a simple center of the soul [94]. 19Kussmaul’s work is remarkable for its psychological insight and its lucid elaborations on the nature of language and the problem it poses. He judged correctly the precocity of any physiological formulation and the futility of a simple hypothetical speech center where language could be localized.Kussmaul認為只從生理去探討語言是不成熟的思想，生理學只是用來決定實驗方法的開端。僅將語言的複雜功能定義為簡單的表達思想中心是不可能的。Kussmaul的著作對於心理學的看法，與語言的本質和其產生的問題皆有獨到的見解。他正確的判斷出任何生理學上的構想是不成熟的，而且把語言設想成侷限在一個假想的語言中心是徒然的。[92] Steinthal, Heyman, Einleitung in die Psychologie und Sprachwissenschaft. Duemmler, Berlin, 1871, pp.42, 82-85, 369-370, 385-86
It comes about after reflexive body movements and entered man's consciousness, and after the association of perceptions with sounds. Language had not been adequatedly understood in the past, because it had been regarded solely as means of communication. It had been incorrectly assumed that man had images, thoughts and the additional ability to express these in terms of sounds. Images and thoughts were themselves based on language.在過去我們並未完全了解語言，認為語言只是用來溝通之工具。過去錯誤的觀念認為人類需要附加的能力，例如意像能力、想考能力等等才能夠用聲音表達。然而，意象與思想能力是以語言為基礎。“We see now…how everything man attains at a higher level than animal consciousness and intuitions, is gained by way of language…Language is self-awareness, that is, understanding oneself… as one is understood by another. One understand oneself: that is the beginning of language”[92].Steinthal’s work had a profound influence on the well-known internist and professor of medicine in Strasbourg, Adolf Kussmaul(1822-1902) who devoted the first fifteen chapters of his book ”On the Pathology of Language,” to define and describe languages as such. “Language may refer to the physical –mental act of the expression of thoughts, or to that which is expressed. To attempt the understanding of language as an act of expression, is the task of physiology and psychology. ”
「我們現在了解了….人類的直覺與意識之所以可以高於其他動物，是來自於語言….語言是自覺性的，也就是說，了解自己就像是一個人被其他人所了解一樣。一個人能夠了解自己的意義是：語言的起源(註解92)」
Steinthal的作品對Adolf Kussmaul的影響很大。Adolf Kussmaul是一個著名的內科醫師也是斯特拉斯堡(法國東北部城市)的一個醫學教授。其著作的前十五個章節都在談「語言的病理學」，他把語言定義為：「語言可視為身體和心理的表達思想行為，或者視為所表達出來的東西。」將語言了解成為一種表達，是心理學和生理學共同的議題。His description of the development of language in children is remarkably perceptive: Children are born with a sense of language, an irresistible drive to express themselves. The babbling of infants is a spontaneous reflex activity, as are the uncoordinated movements of their limbs. As the child grows, it begins to listen, to differentiate sounds and to imitate words.
他對於兒童的語言習得有很前瞻性的觀點：「兒童生下來便具有語感，不可抗拒的機制促使他們表達自我。嬰兒時期的兒語是自發性的反射動作，就如同他們雙腳搖搖晃晃的學習走路一樣。小孩長大後，便開始聆聽不同的語音並模仿發音。」
This is not a simple process, some words the child understands without imitating them, others it imitates without understanding their meaning. In general terms, language development shows a gradual replacement of “the natural language of the child”(babbling), by the traditional language of the nation. As this is accomplished, language is removed from the spontaneous sphere and comes under the rule of will and habits.
這並不是一個簡單的過程，有些字小孩子可以理解但並不模仿它們，有些字小孩子雖然不了解其語意卻會模仿其發音。大致上來說，語言的發展顯現出了自然的語言(兒語)漸漸的被國家的傳統語言取代。一但這個過程完成後，語言從自發性變成習慣性且表達思考的規則。
Full development of language is equivalent to expression of (conceptualized) thoughts. Once this as occurred, the child has acquired the ability to elaborate the object images connected with words into concepts [93].Language poses a difficult problem in that it develops “without consciousness or purpose, although (later) we speak consciously and purposefully.” This need not surprise us, for most neural and mental activity is predominantly unconscious.
完整的語言發展相當於概念化的思想表達。一但語言完整發展，小孩便有能力將指稱的東西與字和概念連結。語言存在一個問題，因為語言的發展是不自覺且無目的的，雖然我們後來在說話時是自覺的且有目的的。但是並不需要對這個感到驚訝，因為許多神經與心理活都都是不自覺下產生的。
Kussmaul thought that it would be premature to discuss language in purely physiological terms, as long as physiology was just beginning to decide on its experimental methods. It would be just as impossible to ascribe the complex function of language to simple speech center as to define a simple center of the soul [94]. 19Kussmaul’s work is remarkable for its psychological insight and its lucid elaborations on the nature of language and the problem it poses. He judged correctly the precocity of any physiological formulation and the futility of a simple hypothetical speech center where language could be localized.Kussmaul認為只從生理去探討語言是不成熟的思想，生理學只是用來決定實驗方法的開端。僅將語言的複雜功能定義為簡單的表達思想中心是不可能的。Kussmaul的著作對於心理學的看法，與語言的本質和其產生的問題皆有獨到的見解。他正確的判斷出任何生理學上的構想是不成熟的，而且把語言設想成侷限在一個假想的語言中心是徒然的。[92] Steinthal, Heyman, Einleitung in die Psychologie und Sprachwissenschaft. Duemmler, Berlin, 1871, pp.42, 82-85, 369-370, 385-86
2009年1月7日 星期三
生物語言學相關學科---Behaviorism
Behaviorism
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Psychology
Portal • HistoryAreas
RESEARCH
AbnormalBiologicalCognitiveDevelopmentalEmotionExperimentalEvolutionaryMathematicalNeuropsychologyPersonalityPositivePsychophysicsSocialTranspersonal
APPLIED
ClinicalEducationalForensicHealthIndustrialOrganizationalSchoolSport
LISTS
PublicationsTopicsTherapies
v • d • e
It has been suggested that Practice (learning method) be merged into this article or section. (Discuss)
Behaviorism or Behaviourism, also called the learning perspective (where any physical action is a behavior) is a philosophy of psychology based on the proposition that all things which organisms do — including acting, thinking and feeling—can and should be regarded as behaviors.[1] The school of psychology maintains that behaviors as such can be described scientifically without recourse either to internal physiological events or to hypothetical constructs such as the mind.[2] Behaviorism comprises the position that all theories should have observational correlates but that there are no philosophical differences between publicly observable processes (such as actions) and privately observable processes (such as thinking and feeling).[3] Behaviourism is the sum total of all actions namely verbal,mental,physical,sensory.
From early psychology in the 19th century, the behaviorist school of thought ran concurrently and shared commonalities with the psychoanalytic and Gestalt movements in psychology into the 20th century; but also differed from the mental philosophy of the Gestalt psychologists in critical ways.[citation needed] Its main influences were Ivan Pavlov, who investigated classical conditioning, Edward Lee Thorndike, John B. Watson who rejected introspective methods and sought to restrict psychology to experimental methods, and B.F. Skinner who conducted research on operant conditioning. [3] In the second half of the twentieth century, behaviorism was largely eclipsed as a result of the cognitive revolution.
Versions
There is no classification generally agreed upon, but some titles given to the various branches of behaviorism include:
Classical: The behaviorism of Watson; the objective study of behavior; no mental life, no internal states; thought is covert speech.
Radical: Skinner's behaviorism; is considered radical since it expands behavioral principles to processes within the organism; in contrast to methodological behaviorism; not mechanistic or reductionist; hypothetical (mentalistic) internal states are not considered causes of behavior, phenomena must be observable at least to the individual experiencing them. Willard Van Orman Quine used many of radical behaviorism's ideas in his study of knowing and language.
Teleological: Post-Skinnerian, purposive, close to microeconomics.
Theoretical: Post-Skinnerian, accepts observable internal states ("within the skin" once meant "unobservable", but with modern technology we are not so constrained); dynamic, but eclectic in choice of theoretical structures, emphasizes parsimony.
Biological: Post-Skinnerian, centered on perceptual and motor modules of behavior, theory of behavior systems.
Two popular subtypes are Neo: Hullian and post-Hullian, theoretical, group data, not dynamic, physiological, and Purposive: Tolman’s behavioristic anticipation of cognitive psychology.
B.F. Skinner and radical behaviorism
Main article: Radical behaviorism
Skinner, who carried out experimental work mainly in comparative psychology from the 1930s to the 1950s, but remained behaviorism's best known theorist and exponent virtually until his death in 1990, developed a distinct kind of behaviorist philosophy, which came to be called radical behaviorism. He is credited with having founded a new version of psychological science, which has come to be called behavior analysis or the experimental analysis of behavior after variations on the subtitle to his 1938 work The Behavior of Organisms: An Experimental Analysis Of Behavior.
Definition
B.F Skinner was influential in defining radical behaviorism, a philosophy codifying the basis of his school of research (named the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, or EAB.) While EAB differs from other approaches to behavioral research on numerous methodological and theoretical points, radical behaviorism departs from methodological behaviorism most notably in accepting treatment of feelings, states of mind and introspection as existent and scientifically treatable. This is done by identifying them as something non-dualistic, and here Skinner takes a divide-and-conquer approach, with some instances being identified with bodily conditions or behavior, and others getting a more extended 'analysis' in terms of behavior. However, radical behaviorism stops short of identifying feelings as causes of behavior.[1] Among other points of difference were a rejection of the reflex as a model of all behavior and a defense of a science of behavior complementary to but independent of physiology. Radical behaviorism has considerable overlap with other western philosophical positions such as American pragmatism [4]
Experimental and conceptual innovations
This essentially philosophical position gained strength from the success of Skinner's early experimental work with rats and pigeons, summarized in his books The Behavior of Organisms[5] and Schedules of Reinforcement.[6] Of particular importance was his concept of the operant response, of which the canonical example was the rat's lever-press. In contrast with the idea of a physiological or reflex response, an operant is a class of structurally distinct but functionally equivalent responses. For example, while a rat might press a lever with its left paw or its right paw or its tail, all of these responses operate on the world in the same way and have a common consequence. Operants are often thought of as species of responses, where the individuals differ but the class coheres in its function--shared consequences with operants and reproductive success with species. This is a clear distinction between Skinner's theory and S-R theory.
Skinner's empirical work expanded on earlier research on trial-and-error learning by researchers such as Thorndike and Guthrie with both conceptual reformulations – Thorndike's notion of a stimulus-response 'association' or 'connection' was abandoned – and methodological ones – the use of the 'free operant', so called because the animal was now permitted to respond at its own rate rather than in a series of trials determined by the experimenter procedures. With this method, Skinner carried out substantial experimental work on the effects of different schedules and rates of reinforcement on the rates of operant responses made by rats and pigeons. He achieved remarkable success in training animals to perform unexpected responses, and to emit large numbers of responses, and to demonstrate many empirical regularities at the purely behavioral level. This lent some credibility to his conceptual analysis. It is largely his conceptual analysis that made his work much more rigorous than his peers, a point which can be seen clearly in his seminal work Are Theories of Learning Necessary? in which he criticizes what he viewed to be theoretical weaknesses then common in the study of psychology. An important descendant of the experimental analysis of behavior is the Society for Quantitative Analysis of Behavior.[7]
[edit] Relation to language
As Skinner turned from experimental work to concentrate on the philosophical underpinnings of a science of behavior, his attention turned to human language with Verbal Behavior[8] and other language-related publications;[9] Verbal Behavior laid out a vocabulary and theory for functional analysis of verbal behavior, and was strongly criticized in a review by Noam Chomsky.[10] Skinner did not respond in detail but claimed that Chomsky failed to understand his ideas,[11] and the disagreements between the two and the theories involved have been further discussed.[12][13]
What was important for a behaviorist's analysis of human behavior was not language acquisition so much as the interaction between language and overt behavior. In an essay republished in his 1969 book Contingencies of Reinforcement,[14] Skinner took the view that humans could construct linguistic stimuli that would then acquire control over their behavior in the same way that external stimuli could. The possibility of such "instructional control" over behavior meant that contingencies of reinforcement would not always produce the same effects on human behavior as they reliably do in other animals. The focus of a radical behaviorist analysis of human behavior therefore shifted to an attempt to understand the interaction between instructional control and contingency control, and also to understand the behavioral processes that determine what instructions are constructed and what control they acquire over behavior.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Psychology
Portal • HistoryAreas
RESEARCH
AbnormalBiologicalCognitiveDevelopmentalEmotionExperimentalEvolutionaryMathematicalNeuropsychologyPersonalityPositivePsychophysicsSocialTranspersonal
APPLIED
ClinicalEducationalForensicHealthIndustrialOrganizationalSchoolSport
LISTS
PublicationsTopicsTherapies
v • d • e
It has been suggested that Practice (learning method) be merged into this article or section. (Discuss)
Behaviorism or Behaviourism, also called the learning perspective (where any physical action is a behavior) is a philosophy of psychology based on the proposition that all things which organisms do — including acting, thinking and feeling—can and should be regarded as behaviors.[1] The school of psychology maintains that behaviors as such can be described scientifically without recourse either to internal physiological events or to hypothetical constructs such as the mind.[2] Behaviorism comprises the position that all theories should have observational correlates but that there are no philosophical differences between publicly observable processes (such as actions) and privately observable processes (such as thinking and feeling).[3] Behaviourism is the sum total of all actions namely verbal,mental,physical,sensory.
From early psychology in the 19th century, the behaviorist school of thought ran concurrently and shared commonalities with the psychoanalytic and Gestalt movements in psychology into the 20th century; but also differed from the mental philosophy of the Gestalt psychologists in critical ways.[citation needed] Its main influences were Ivan Pavlov, who investigated classical conditioning, Edward Lee Thorndike, John B. Watson who rejected introspective methods and sought to restrict psychology to experimental methods, and B.F. Skinner who conducted research on operant conditioning. [3] In the second half of the twentieth century, behaviorism was largely eclipsed as a result of the cognitive revolution.
Versions
There is no classification generally agreed upon, but some titles given to the various branches of behaviorism include:
Classical: The behaviorism of Watson; the objective study of behavior; no mental life, no internal states; thought is covert speech.
Radical: Skinner's behaviorism; is considered radical since it expands behavioral principles to processes within the organism; in contrast to methodological behaviorism; not mechanistic or reductionist; hypothetical (mentalistic) internal states are not considered causes of behavior, phenomena must be observable at least to the individual experiencing them. Willard Van Orman Quine used many of radical behaviorism's ideas in his study of knowing and language.
Teleological: Post-Skinnerian, purposive, close to microeconomics.
Theoretical: Post-Skinnerian, accepts observable internal states ("within the skin" once meant "unobservable", but with modern technology we are not so constrained); dynamic, but eclectic in choice of theoretical structures, emphasizes parsimony.
Biological: Post-Skinnerian, centered on perceptual and motor modules of behavior, theory of behavior systems.
Two popular subtypes are Neo: Hullian and post-Hullian, theoretical, group data, not dynamic, physiological, and Purposive: Tolman’s behavioristic anticipation of cognitive psychology.
B.F. Skinner and radical behaviorism
Main article: Radical behaviorism
Skinner, who carried out experimental work mainly in comparative psychology from the 1930s to the 1950s, but remained behaviorism's best known theorist and exponent virtually until his death in 1990, developed a distinct kind of behaviorist philosophy, which came to be called radical behaviorism. He is credited with having founded a new version of psychological science, which has come to be called behavior analysis or the experimental analysis of behavior after variations on the subtitle to his 1938 work The Behavior of Organisms: An Experimental Analysis Of Behavior.
Definition
B.F Skinner was influential in defining radical behaviorism, a philosophy codifying the basis of his school of research (named the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, or EAB.) While EAB differs from other approaches to behavioral research on numerous methodological and theoretical points, radical behaviorism departs from methodological behaviorism most notably in accepting treatment of feelings, states of mind and introspection as existent and scientifically treatable. This is done by identifying them as something non-dualistic, and here Skinner takes a divide-and-conquer approach, with some instances being identified with bodily conditions or behavior, and others getting a more extended 'analysis' in terms of behavior. However, radical behaviorism stops short of identifying feelings as causes of behavior.[1] Among other points of difference were a rejection of the reflex as a model of all behavior and a defense of a science of behavior complementary to but independent of physiology. Radical behaviorism has considerable overlap with other western philosophical positions such as American pragmatism [4]
Experimental and conceptual innovations
This essentially philosophical position gained strength from the success of Skinner's early experimental work with rats and pigeons, summarized in his books The Behavior of Organisms[5] and Schedules of Reinforcement.[6] Of particular importance was his concept of the operant response, of which the canonical example was the rat's lever-press. In contrast with the idea of a physiological or reflex response, an operant is a class of structurally distinct but functionally equivalent responses. For example, while a rat might press a lever with its left paw or its right paw or its tail, all of these responses operate on the world in the same way and have a common consequence. Operants are often thought of as species of responses, where the individuals differ but the class coheres in its function--shared consequences with operants and reproductive success with species. This is a clear distinction between Skinner's theory and S-R theory.
Skinner's empirical work expanded on earlier research on trial-and-error learning by researchers such as Thorndike and Guthrie with both conceptual reformulations – Thorndike's notion of a stimulus-response 'association' or 'connection' was abandoned – and methodological ones – the use of the 'free operant', so called because the animal was now permitted to respond at its own rate rather than in a series of trials determined by the experimenter procedures. With this method, Skinner carried out substantial experimental work on the effects of different schedules and rates of reinforcement on the rates of operant responses made by rats and pigeons. He achieved remarkable success in training animals to perform unexpected responses, and to emit large numbers of responses, and to demonstrate many empirical regularities at the purely behavioral level. This lent some credibility to his conceptual analysis. It is largely his conceptual analysis that made his work much more rigorous than his peers, a point which can be seen clearly in his seminal work Are Theories of Learning Necessary? in which he criticizes what he viewed to be theoretical weaknesses then common in the study of psychology. An important descendant of the experimental analysis of behavior is the Society for Quantitative Analysis of Behavior.[7]
[edit] Relation to language
As Skinner turned from experimental work to concentrate on the philosophical underpinnings of a science of behavior, his attention turned to human language with Verbal Behavior[8] and other language-related publications;[9] Verbal Behavior laid out a vocabulary and theory for functional analysis of verbal behavior, and was strongly criticized in a review by Noam Chomsky.[10] Skinner did not respond in detail but claimed that Chomsky failed to understand his ideas,[11] and the disagreements between the two and the theories involved have been further discussed.[12][13]
What was important for a behaviorist's analysis of human behavior was not language acquisition so much as the interaction between language and overt behavior. In an essay republished in his 1969 book Contingencies of Reinforcement,[14] Skinner took the view that humans could construct linguistic stimuli that would then acquire control over their behavior in the same way that external stimuli could. The possibility of such "instructional control" over behavior meant that contingencies of reinforcement would not always produce the same effects on human behavior as they reliably do in other animals. The focus of a radical behaviorist analysis of human behavior therefore shifted to an attempt to understand the interaction between instructional control and contingency control, and also to understand the behavioral processes that determine what instructions are constructed and what control they acquire over behavior.
生物語言學相關學科---心理學
Psychology
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Psychology
Portal • HistoryAreas
RESEARCH
AbnormalBiologicalCognitiveDevelopmentalEmotionExperimentalEvolutionaryMathematicalNeuropsychologyPersonalityPositivePsychophysicsSocialTranspersonal
APPLIED
ClinicalEducationalForensicHealthIndustrialOrganizationalSchoolSport
LISTS
PublicationsTopicsTherapies
v • d • e
"Psychological science" redirects here. For the journal, see Psychological Science (journal).
Psychology (from Greek ψῡχή, psȳkhē, "breath, life, soul"; and -λογία, -logia) is an academic and applied discipline involving the scientific study of mental functions and behavior. Psychologists study such phenomena as perception, cognition, emotion, personality, behavior, and interpersonal relationships. Psychology also refers to the application of such knowledge to various spheres of human activity, including issues related to everyday life (e.g. family, education, and employment) and the treatment of mental health problems. Psychologists attempt to understand the role of these functions in individual and social behavior, while also exploring the underlying physiological and neurological processes. Psychology includes many sub-fields of study and applications concerned with such areas as human development, sports, health, industry, media, and law.
History
Main article: History of psychology
Auguste Rodin's The Thinker.
[edit] Philosophical and scientific roots
The study of psychology in philosophical context dates back to the ancient civilizations of Egypt, Greece, China, and India. Psychology began adopting a more clinical[1] and experimental[2] approach under medieval Muslim psychologists and physicians, who built psychiatric hospitals for such purposes.[3]
Though the use of psychological experimentation dates back to Alhazen's Book of Optics in 1021,[2][4] psychology as an independent experimental field of study began in 1879, when Wilhelm Wundt founded the first laboratory dedicated exclusively to psychological research at Leipzig University in Germany, for which Wundt is known as the "father of psychology".[5] The year 1879 is thus sometimes regarded as the "birthdate" of psychology. The American philosopher William James published his seminal book, Principles of Psychology,[6] in 1890, while laying the foundations for many of the questions that psychologists would focus on for years to come. Other important early contributors to the field include Hermann Ebbinghaus (1850–1909), a pioneer in the experimental study of memory at the University of Berlin; and the Russian physiologist Ivan Pavlov (1849-1936), who investigated the learning process now referred to as classical conditioning.
Psychoanalysis
Main article: Psychoanalysis
From the 1890s until his death in 1939, the Austrian physician Sigmund Freud developed a method of psychotherapy known as psychoanalysis. Freud was a neurologist whose understanding of the mind was largely based on interpretive methods, introspection and clinical observations, and was focused in particular on resolving unconscious conflict, mental distress and psychopathology. Freud's theories became very well-known, largely because they tackled subjects such as sexuality, repression, and the unconscious mind as general aspects of psychological development. These were largely considered taboo subjects at the time, and Freud provided a catalyst for them to be openly discussed in polite society. While Freud is perhaps best known for his tripartite model of the mind, consisting of the id, ego, and superego, and his theories about the Oedipus complex, his most lasting legacy may be not the content of his theories but his clinical innovations, such as the method of free association and a clinical interest in dreams. Freud also had a significant influence on Carl Jung, whose analytical psychology became an alternative form of depth psychology. Other well-known psychoanalytic thinkers of the mid-twentieth century included Erik Erickson, Anna Freud, Melanie Klein, D.W. Winnicott, Karen Horney, Erich Fromm, and John Bowlby.
Philosopher Karl Popper argued that Freud's psychoanalytic theories were presented in untestable form.[7] Psychology departments in American universities today are scientifically oriented, and Freudian theory has been marginalized, being regarded instead as a "desiccated and dead" historical artifact, acccording to a recent APA study.[8]
Contemporary psychoanalysis comprises diverse schools of thought, including ego psychology, object relations, interpersonal, Lacanian, and relational psychoanalysis. Modification of Jung's theories has led to the archetypal and process-oriented schools of psychological thought.
Behaviorism
Main article: Behaviorism
Founded by John B. Watson and embraced and extended by Edward Thorndike, Clark L. Hull, Edward C. Tolman, and later B.F. Skinner. Founders of early psychology in the late 19th and early part of the 20th century, Wilhelm Wundt and William James, studied the mind via introspection. During the early decades of the 20th century behaviorism gained popularity as a guiding psychological theory. The behaviorists (e.g. Watson) argued the contents of the mind were not open to scientific scrutiny and that scientific psychology should only be concerned with the study of observable behavior. There was no consideration of the internal representation or the mind. The rise of behaviorism was partly due to the success of laboratory based animal experimentation and partly in reaction to Freudian psychodynamics which tended to rely on case studies and clinical experience. Freud's theories and practice focused on the resolution unconscious conflict often arising from childhood experiences to treat psychological trauma and psychosis. However, it was argued that Freud's theories were difficult to test empirically.
Behaviorism differs from other perspectives in a number of ways. Behaviorists focus on behavior-environment relations and analyze overt and covert (i.e., private) behavior as a function of the organism interacting with its environment [9]. Behaviorists do not reject the study of covert or private events (e.g., dreaming). What behaviorists reject is an autonomous causal entity inside the organism that causes overt (e.g., walking, talking) or covert (e.g., dreaming, imagining) behavior. Concepts such as "mind" or "consciousness" are not used by behaviorists because such terms do not describe actual psychological events (such as imagining) but are used as explanatory entities hidden somewhere in the organism. By contrast, behaviorism treats private events as behavior, and analyzes them in the same way as overt behavior (hence the name "behaviorism"). Behavior refers to the concrete events of the organism, overt or private.
Linguist Noam Chomsky's critique of the behaviorist model of language acquisition is regarded by many as a key turning point in the decline in the prominence of the theory of behaviorism generally.[10] But Skinner's behaviorism has not died, perhaps in part because it has generated successful practical applications.[10] The ascendancy of behaviorism as an overarching model in psychology, however, gave way to the next dominant paradigm, cognitive approaches.[11]
Humanism and existentialism
Main article: Humanistic psychology
Humanistic psychology was developed in the 1950s in reaction to both behaviorism and psychoanalysis. By using phenomenology, intersubjectivity and first-person categories, the humanistic approach seeks to glimpse the whole person--not just the fragmented parts of the personality or cognitive functioning.[12] Humanism focuses on uniquely human issues and fundamental issues of life, such as self-identity, death, aloneness, freedom, and meaning. There are several factors which distinguish the Humanistic Approach from other approaches within psychology, including the emphasis on subjective meaning, a rejection of determinism, and a concern for positive growth rather than pathology. Some of the founding theorists behind this school of thought were Abraham Maslow who formulated a hierarchy of human needs, Carl Rogers who created and developed Client-centered therapy, and Fritz Perls who helped create and develop Gestalt therapy. It became so influential as to be called the "third force" within psychology (along with behaviorism and psychoanalysis).[13]
Influenced largely by the work of German philosopher Martin Heidegger and Danish philosopher Søren Kierkegaard, psychoanalytically-trained Rollo May developed an existential breed of psychology in the 1950s and 1960s. Existential psychologists argued that people must come to terms with their mortality and that, in so doing, people will be obligated to accept that they are free—that they possess free will and are at liberty to defy expectations and conventions in order to forge their own, meaningful paths through life. May believed that an important element of the meaning-making process is the search for myths, or narrative patterns into which the individual may fit.[14]
From the existential perspective, not only does the quest for meaning follow from an acceptance of mortality, but the attainment of meaning can overshadow the prospect of death. As existential psychiatrist and Holocaust survivor Viktor Frankl observed,[15]
We who lived in concentration camps can remember the men who walked through the huts comforting others, giving away their last piece of bread. They may have been few in number, but they offer sufficient proof that everything can be taken from a man but one thing: the last of the human freedoms—to choose one's attitude in any given set of circumstances, to choose one's own way.[16]
In addition to May and Frankl, psychoanalyst Ludwig Binswanger and psychologist George Kelly may be said to belong to the existential school.[17]
Both existential and humanistic psychologists argue that people should strive to reach their full potential, but only humanistic psychologists believe that this striving is innate. For existential psychologists, the striving only follows an anxiety-producing contemplation of mortality, freedom, and responsibility.[18]
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Psychology
Portal • HistoryAreas
RESEARCH
AbnormalBiologicalCognitiveDevelopmentalEmotionExperimentalEvolutionaryMathematicalNeuropsychologyPersonalityPositivePsychophysicsSocialTranspersonal
APPLIED
ClinicalEducationalForensicHealthIndustrialOrganizationalSchoolSport
LISTS
PublicationsTopicsTherapies
v • d • e
"Psychological science" redirects here. For the journal, see Psychological Science (journal).
Psychology (from Greek ψῡχή, psȳkhē, "breath, life, soul"; and -λογία, -logia) is an academic and applied discipline involving the scientific study of mental functions and behavior. Psychologists study such phenomena as perception, cognition, emotion, personality, behavior, and interpersonal relationships. Psychology also refers to the application of such knowledge to various spheres of human activity, including issues related to everyday life (e.g. family, education, and employment) and the treatment of mental health problems. Psychologists attempt to understand the role of these functions in individual and social behavior, while also exploring the underlying physiological and neurological processes. Psychology includes many sub-fields of study and applications concerned with such areas as human development, sports, health, industry, media, and law.
History
Main article: History of psychology
Auguste Rodin's The Thinker.
[edit] Philosophical and scientific roots
The study of psychology in philosophical context dates back to the ancient civilizations of Egypt, Greece, China, and India. Psychology began adopting a more clinical[1] and experimental[2] approach under medieval Muslim psychologists and physicians, who built psychiatric hospitals for such purposes.[3]
Though the use of psychological experimentation dates back to Alhazen's Book of Optics in 1021,[2][4] psychology as an independent experimental field of study began in 1879, when Wilhelm Wundt founded the first laboratory dedicated exclusively to psychological research at Leipzig University in Germany, for which Wundt is known as the "father of psychology".[5] The year 1879 is thus sometimes regarded as the "birthdate" of psychology. The American philosopher William James published his seminal book, Principles of Psychology,[6] in 1890, while laying the foundations for many of the questions that psychologists would focus on for years to come. Other important early contributors to the field include Hermann Ebbinghaus (1850–1909), a pioneer in the experimental study of memory at the University of Berlin; and the Russian physiologist Ivan Pavlov (1849-1936), who investigated the learning process now referred to as classical conditioning.
Psychoanalysis
Main article: Psychoanalysis
From the 1890s until his death in 1939, the Austrian physician Sigmund Freud developed a method of psychotherapy known as psychoanalysis. Freud was a neurologist whose understanding of the mind was largely based on interpretive methods, introspection and clinical observations, and was focused in particular on resolving unconscious conflict, mental distress and psychopathology. Freud's theories became very well-known, largely because they tackled subjects such as sexuality, repression, and the unconscious mind as general aspects of psychological development. These were largely considered taboo subjects at the time, and Freud provided a catalyst for them to be openly discussed in polite society. While Freud is perhaps best known for his tripartite model of the mind, consisting of the id, ego, and superego, and his theories about the Oedipus complex, his most lasting legacy may be not the content of his theories but his clinical innovations, such as the method of free association and a clinical interest in dreams. Freud also had a significant influence on Carl Jung, whose analytical psychology became an alternative form of depth psychology. Other well-known psychoanalytic thinkers of the mid-twentieth century included Erik Erickson, Anna Freud, Melanie Klein, D.W. Winnicott, Karen Horney, Erich Fromm, and John Bowlby.
Philosopher Karl Popper argued that Freud's psychoanalytic theories were presented in untestable form.[7] Psychology departments in American universities today are scientifically oriented, and Freudian theory has been marginalized, being regarded instead as a "desiccated and dead" historical artifact, acccording to a recent APA study.[8]
Contemporary psychoanalysis comprises diverse schools of thought, including ego psychology, object relations, interpersonal, Lacanian, and relational psychoanalysis. Modification of Jung's theories has led to the archetypal and process-oriented schools of psychological thought.
Behaviorism
Main article: Behaviorism
Founded by John B. Watson and embraced and extended by Edward Thorndike, Clark L. Hull, Edward C. Tolman, and later B.F. Skinner. Founders of early psychology in the late 19th and early part of the 20th century, Wilhelm Wundt and William James, studied the mind via introspection. During the early decades of the 20th century behaviorism gained popularity as a guiding psychological theory. The behaviorists (e.g. Watson) argued the contents of the mind were not open to scientific scrutiny and that scientific psychology should only be concerned with the study of observable behavior. There was no consideration of the internal representation or the mind. The rise of behaviorism was partly due to the success of laboratory based animal experimentation and partly in reaction to Freudian psychodynamics which tended to rely on case studies and clinical experience. Freud's theories and practice focused on the resolution unconscious conflict often arising from childhood experiences to treat psychological trauma and psychosis. However, it was argued that Freud's theories were difficult to test empirically.
Behaviorism differs from other perspectives in a number of ways. Behaviorists focus on behavior-environment relations and analyze overt and covert (i.e., private) behavior as a function of the organism interacting with its environment [9]. Behaviorists do not reject the study of covert or private events (e.g., dreaming). What behaviorists reject is an autonomous causal entity inside the organism that causes overt (e.g., walking, talking) or covert (e.g., dreaming, imagining) behavior. Concepts such as "mind" or "consciousness" are not used by behaviorists because such terms do not describe actual psychological events (such as imagining) but are used as explanatory entities hidden somewhere in the organism. By contrast, behaviorism treats private events as behavior, and analyzes them in the same way as overt behavior (hence the name "behaviorism"). Behavior refers to the concrete events of the organism, overt or private.
Linguist Noam Chomsky's critique of the behaviorist model of language acquisition is regarded by many as a key turning point in the decline in the prominence of the theory of behaviorism generally.[10] But Skinner's behaviorism has not died, perhaps in part because it has generated successful practical applications.[10] The ascendancy of behaviorism as an overarching model in psychology, however, gave way to the next dominant paradigm, cognitive approaches.[11]
Humanism and existentialism
Main article: Humanistic psychology
Humanistic psychology was developed in the 1950s in reaction to both behaviorism and psychoanalysis. By using phenomenology, intersubjectivity and first-person categories, the humanistic approach seeks to glimpse the whole person--not just the fragmented parts of the personality or cognitive functioning.[12] Humanism focuses on uniquely human issues and fundamental issues of life, such as self-identity, death, aloneness, freedom, and meaning. There are several factors which distinguish the Humanistic Approach from other approaches within psychology, including the emphasis on subjective meaning, a rejection of determinism, and a concern for positive growth rather than pathology. Some of the founding theorists behind this school of thought were Abraham Maslow who formulated a hierarchy of human needs, Carl Rogers who created and developed Client-centered therapy, and Fritz Perls who helped create and develop Gestalt therapy. It became so influential as to be called the "third force" within psychology (along with behaviorism and psychoanalysis).[13]
Influenced largely by the work of German philosopher Martin Heidegger and Danish philosopher Søren Kierkegaard, psychoanalytically-trained Rollo May developed an existential breed of psychology in the 1950s and 1960s. Existential psychologists argued that people must come to terms with their mortality and that, in so doing, people will be obligated to accept that they are free—that they possess free will and are at liberty to defy expectations and conventions in order to forge their own, meaningful paths through life. May believed that an important element of the meaning-making process is the search for myths, or narrative patterns into which the individual may fit.[14]
From the existential perspective, not only does the quest for meaning follow from an acceptance of mortality, but the attainment of meaning can overshadow the prospect of death. As existential psychiatrist and Holocaust survivor Viktor Frankl observed,[15]
We who lived in concentration camps can remember the men who walked through the huts comforting others, giving away their last piece of bread. They may have been few in number, but they offer sufficient proof that everything can be taken from a man but one thing: the last of the human freedoms—to choose one's attitude in any given set of circumstances, to choose one's own way.[16]
In addition to May and Frankl, psychoanalyst Ludwig Binswanger and psychologist George Kelly may be said to belong to the existential school.[17]
Both existential and humanistic psychologists argue that people should strive to reach their full potential, but only humanistic psychologists believe that this striving is innate. For existential psychologists, the striving only follows an anxiety-producing contemplation of mortality, freedom, and responsibility.[18]
生物語言學相關學科---生物學
Biology
Biology studies the variety of life (clockwise from top-left) E. coli, tree fern, gazelle, Goliath beetle
Biology (from Greek βιολογία - βίος, bios, "life"; -λογία, -logia) is the study of life and a branch of the natural sciences which studies living organisms and how they interact with each other and their environment. It examines the structure, function, growth, origin, evolution, and distribution of living things. Also, it classifies and describes organisms, their functions, and how species come into existence. Five unifying principles form the foundation of modern biology: cell theory, evolution, gene theory, energy, and homeostasis.[1]
Biology as a separate science was developed in the nineteenth century as scientists discovered that organisms shared fundamental characteristics. Biology is now a standard subject of instruction at schools and universities around the world, and over a million papers are published annually in a wide array of biology and medicine journals.[2]
Most biological sciences are specialized disciplines. Traditionally, they are grouped by the type of organism being studied: botany, the study of plants; zoology, the study of animals; and microbiology, the study of microorganisms. The fields within biology are further divided based on the scale at which organisms are studied and the methods used to study them: biochemistry examines the fundamental chemistry of life; molecular biology studies the complex interactions of systems of biological molecules; cellular biology examines the basic building block of all life, the cell; physiology examines the physical and chemical functions of the tissues and organ systems of an organism; and ecology examines how various organisms and their environment interrelate.
Contents[hide]
1 Foundations of modern biology
1.1 Cell Theory
1.2 Evolution
1.3 Gene theory
1.4 Homeostasis
1.5 Energy
2 Research
2.1 Structural
2.2 Physiological
2.3 Evolution
2.4 Taxonomy
2.5 Ecology
3 See also
4 References
5 Further reading
6 External links
//
Foundations of modern biology
There are five unifying principles of biology [3]:
Cell theory. Cell Theory is the study of everything that involves cells and tissues. All living organisms are made of at least one cell, the basic unit of function in all organisms. In addition, the core mechanisms and chemistry of all cells in all organisms are similar, and cells emerge only from preexisting cells that multiply through cell division. Cell theory studies how cells are made, how they reproduce, how they interact with their environment, what they are composed of, and how the materials that make up a cell work and interact with other cell sections.
Evolution. Through natural selection and genetic drift, a population's inherited traits change from generation to generation.
Gene theory. A living organism's traits are encoded in DNA, the fundamental component of genes. In addition, traits are passed on from one generation to the next by way of these genes. All information flows from the genotype to the phenotype, the observable physical or biochemical characteristics of the organism. Although the phenotype expressed by the gene may adapt to the environment of the organism, that information is not transferred back to the genes. Only through the process of evolution do genes change in response to the environment.
Homeostasis. The physiological processes that allow an organism to maintain its internal environment notwithstanding its external environment.
Energy. The attribute of any living organism that is essential for its state. (e.g. required for metabolism)
Cell Theory
Main article: Cell theory
Cell theory states that[4]:
The cell is the fundamental unit of life.
All living things are composed of one or more cells or the secreted products of those cells, such as shells.
Cells arise from other cells through cell division
In multicellular organisms, every cell in the organism's body is produced from a single cell in a fertilized egg.
The cell is considered to be the basic part of the pathological processes of an organism.
Evolution
Main article: Evolution
A central organizing concept in biology is that life changes and develops through evolution and that all life-forms known have a common origin (see Common descent). This has led to the striking similarity of units and processes discussed in the previous section. Introduced into the scientific lexicon by Jean-Baptiste de Lamarck in 1809, Charles Darwin established evolution fifty years later as a viable theory by articulating its driving force: natural selection (Alfred Russel Wallace is recognized as the co-discoverer of this concept as he helped research and experiment with the concept of evolution). Darwin theorized that species and breeds developed through the processes of natural selection as well as by artificial selection or selective breeding.[5] Genetic drift was embraced as an additional mechanism of evolutionary development in the modern synthesis of the theory.
The evolutionary history of the species— which describes the characteristics of the various species from which it descended— together with its genealogical relationship to every other species is called its phylogeny. Widely varied approaches to biology generate information about phylogeny. These include the comparisons of DNA sequences conducted within molecular biology or genomics, and comparisons of fossils or other records of ancient organisms in paleontology. Biologists organize and analyze evolutionary relationships through various methods, including phylogenetics, phenetics, and cladistics. For a summary of major events in the evolution of life as currently understood by biologists, see evolutionary timeline.
Up into the 19th century, it was commonly believed that life forms could appear spontaneously under certain conditions (see spontaneous generation). This misconception was challenged by William Harvey's diction that "all life [is] from [an] egg" (from the Latin "Omne vivum ex ovo"), a foundational concept of modern biology. It simply means that there is an unbroken continuity of life from its initial origin to the present time.
A group of organisms share a common descent if they share a common ancestor. All organisms on the Earth both living and extinct have been or are descended from a common ancestor or an ancestral gene pool. This last universal common ancestor of all organisms is believed to have appeared about 3.5 billion years ago.[6] Biologists generally regard the universality of the genetic code as definitive evidence in favor of the theory of universal common descent (UCD) for all bacteria, archaea, and eukaryotes (see: origin of life).
Evolution does not always give rise to progressively more complex organisms. For example, the process of dysgenics has been observed among the human population.[7]
Gene theory
Schematic representation of DNA, the primary genetic material.
Main article: Gene
Biological form and function are passed on to the next generation by genes, which are the primary units of inheritance. Physiological adaptation to an organism's environment cannot be coded into its genes and cannot be inherited by its offspring (see Lamarckism). Remarkably, widely different organisms, including bacteria, plants, animals, and fungi, all share the same basic machinery that copies and transcribes DNA into proteins. For example, bacteria with inserted human DNA will correctly yield the corresponding human protein.
The total complement of genes in an organism or cell is known as its genome, which is stored on one or more chromosomes. A chromosome is a single, long DNA strand on which thousands of genes, depending on the organism, are encoded. When a gene is active, the DNA code is transcribed into an RNA copy of the gene's information. A ribosome then translates the RNA into a structural protein or catalytic protein
Biology studies the variety of life (clockwise from top-left) E. coli, tree fern, gazelle, Goliath beetle
Biology (from Greek βιολογία - βίος, bios, "life"; -λογία, -logia) is the study of life and a branch of the natural sciences which studies living organisms and how they interact with each other and their environment. It examines the structure, function, growth, origin, evolution, and distribution of living things. Also, it classifies and describes organisms, their functions, and how species come into existence. Five unifying principles form the foundation of modern biology: cell theory, evolution, gene theory, energy, and homeostasis.[1]
Biology as a separate science was developed in the nineteenth century as scientists discovered that organisms shared fundamental characteristics. Biology is now a standard subject of instruction at schools and universities around the world, and over a million papers are published annually in a wide array of biology and medicine journals.[2]
Most biological sciences are specialized disciplines. Traditionally, they are grouped by the type of organism being studied: botany, the study of plants; zoology, the study of animals; and microbiology, the study of microorganisms. The fields within biology are further divided based on the scale at which organisms are studied and the methods used to study them: biochemistry examines the fundamental chemistry of life; molecular biology studies the complex interactions of systems of biological molecules; cellular biology examines the basic building block of all life, the cell; physiology examines the physical and chemical functions of the tissues and organ systems of an organism; and ecology examines how various organisms and their environment interrelate.
Contents[hide]
1 Foundations of modern biology
1.1 Cell Theory
1.2 Evolution
1.3 Gene theory
1.4 Homeostasis
1.5 Energy
2 Research
2.1 Structural
2.2 Physiological
2.3 Evolution
2.4 Taxonomy
2.5 Ecology
3 See also
4 References
5 Further reading
6 External links
//
Foundations of modern biology
There are five unifying principles of biology [3]:
Cell theory. Cell Theory is the study of everything that involves cells and tissues. All living organisms are made of at least one cell, the basic unit of function in all organisms. In addition, the core mechanisms and chemistry of all cells in all organisms are similar, and cells emerge only from preexisting cells that multiply through cell division. Cell theory studies how cells are made, how they reproduce, how they interact with their environment, what they are composed of, and how the materials that make up a cell work and interact with other cell sections.
Evolution. Through natural selection and genetic drift, a population's inherited traits change from generation to generation.
Gene theory. A living organism's traits are encoded in DNA, the fundamental component of genes. In addition, traits are passed on from one generation to the next by way of these genes. All information flows from the genotype to the phenotype, the observable physical or biochemical characteristics of the organism. Although the phenotype expressed by the gene may adapt to the environment of the organism, that information is not transferred back to the genes. Only through the process of evolution do genes change in response to the environment.
Homeostasis. The physiological processes that allow an organism to maintain its internal environment notwithstanding its external environment.
Energy. The attribute of any living organism that is essential for its state. (e.g. required for metabolism)
Cell Theory
Main article: Cell theory
Cell theory states that[4]:
The cell is the fundamental unit of life.
All living things are composed of one or more cells or the secreted products of those cells, such as shells.
Cells arise from other cells through cell division
In multicellular organisms, every cell in the organism's body is produced from a single cell in a fertilized egg.
The cell is considered to be the basic part of the pathological processes of an organism.
Evolution
Main article: Evolution
A central organizing concept in biology is that life changes and develops through evolution and that all life-forms known have a common origin (see Common descent). This has led to the striking similarity of units and processes discussed in the previous section. Introduced into the scientific lexicon by Jean-Baptiste de Lamarck in 1809, Charles Darwin established evolution fifty years later as a viable theory by articulating its driving force: natural selection (Alfred Russel Wallace is recognized as the co-discoverer of this concept as he helped research and experiment with the concept of evolution). Darwin theorized that species and breeds developed through the processes of natural selection as well as by artificial selection or selective breeding.[5] Genetic drift was embraced as an additional mechanism of evolutionary development in the modern synthesis of the theory.
The evolutionary history of the species— which describes the characteristics of the various species from which it descended— together with its genealogical relationship to every other species is called its phylogeny. Widely varied approaches to biology generate information about phylogeny. These include the comparisons of DNA sequences conducted within molecular biology or genomics, and comparisons of fossils or other records of ancient organisms in paleontology. Biologists organize and analyze evolutionary relationships through various methods, including phylogenetics, phenetics, and cladistics. For a summary of major events in the evolution of life as currently understood by biologists, see evolutionary timeline.
Up into the 19th century, it was commonly believed that life forms could appear spontaneously under certain conditions (see spontaneous generation). This misconception was challenged by William Harvey's diction that "all life [is] from [an] egg" (from the Latin "Omne vivum ex ovo"), a foundational concept of modern biology. It simply means that there is an unbroken continuity of life from its initial origin to the present time.
A group of organisms share a common descent if they share a common ancestor. All organisms on the Earth both living and extinct have been or are descended from a common ancestor or an ancestral gene pool. This last universal common ancestor of all organisms is believed to have appeared about 3.5 billion years ago.[6] Biologists generally regard the universality of the genetic code as definitive evidence in favor of the theory of universal common descent (UCD) for all bacteria, archaea, and eukaryotes (see: origin of life).
Evolution does not always give rise to progressively more complex organisms. For example, the process of dysgenics has been observed among the human population.[7]
Gene theory
Schematic representation of DNA, the primary genetic material.
Main article: Gene
Biological form and function are passed on to the next generation by genes, which are the primary units of inheritance. Physiological adaptation to an organism's environment cannot be coded into its genes and cannot be inherited by its offspring (see Lamarckism). Remarkably, widely different organisms, including bacteria, plants, animals, and fungi, all share the same basic machinery that copies and transcribes DNA into proteins. For example, bacteria with inserted human DNA will correctly yield the corresponding human protein.
The total complement of genes in an organism or cell is known as its genome, which is stored on one or more chromosomes. A chromosome is a single, long DNA strand on which thousands of genes, depending on the organism, are encoded. When a gene is active, the DNA code is transcribed into an RNA copy of the gene's information. A ribosome then translates the RNA into a structural protein or catalytic protein
LBT 393 伊津
Recognition of syntactic patterns cannot be accomplished on basis of probability statistics (Chomsky and Miller, 1963; Chomsky 1963; Miller and Chomsky, 1963). The rules that underly syntax (which are the same for understanding and speaking) are of a very specific kind, and unless man or mechanical devices do their processing of incoming sentences in accordance with these rules, the logical, formal, analysis of the input will be deficient, resulting in incorrect or random responses. When we say rules must have been built into the grammatical analyzer, we impute the existence of an apparatus with specific structure properties or, in other words, a spectic internal organization.
辨示句法樣式不能以機率統計為基礎而達成(Chomsky and Miller, 1963; Chomsky 1963; Miller and Chomsky, 1963)，構成句法之基礎的規則(和用來理解和說話的規則相同)屬於一種非常特定的規則，除非人類或者是機械儀器按照這些規則來處理接收到的句子，對於這些輸入的邏輯、形式的分析將會是不足的，因而導致不正確或者隨機的反應。當我們說規則必須內建於語法分析器時，我們設想存在一個器官，它具有特定結構的特性，或者換言之，具有特定的內在組織。In a certain sense all organisms are self-organizing systems. And, therefore, the question that faces us is, “What is the degree of freedom with which the specific organization necessary for language processing comes into being.” If the freedom were unlimited, the nature of man would unlimited in its capacities. This must be rejected for obvious reasons. There is no other organism with unlimited capacities and we no longer believe that man is different from other creatures in such fundamental ways. In fact, there is no possible way in which we could think of a device, natural or artificial, that is free from all structural limitations. At best we may assume that a certain mechanism has the capacity to organize itself in more than one way (that is, depending on certain conditions of input, it may eventually be operating in any one of a number of possible modes). This formulation makes it clear that in any case we must assume a biological matrix with specifiable characteristics that determines the outcome of any treatment to which the organism is subjected. Thus the search for innate properties is well within the scope biological inquiry.
在某種意義上，所有的有機體都是自我組織的系統。於是，我們面對的問題就是，”一個特定的組織得要有什麼樣的自由度，才能夠處理語言。”如果這項自由度沒有設限的話，那麼人類的天性會有無限的能力。這種情形基於一些很明顯的理由會被駁斥。世上沒有其他有機體具有無限制的能力，而我們也不再相信人類和其他生物有什麼根本上的不同。事實上，我們找不到可能的方法去設想出一個裝置能夠免於所有結構上的限制，無論其屬於自然或人工的。我們最多只能推想有某種機制，它有能力以不只一種方式來組織自己(也就是說，根據某些輸入的條件，它最終會以許多可能模式中的一種來運作)。這個構想說明了，在任何情況下，我們都必須假設有一個生物學的矩陣，它具有可加以特定的特徵，而這樣的特徵可以決定有機物所受的任何遭遇會有何結果。於是，對於內在能力的探索是包含在生物學研究的範圍之內。
辨示句法樣式不能以機率統計為基礎而達成(Chomsky and Miller, 1963; Chomsky 1963; Miller and Chomsky, 1963)，構成句法之基礎的規則(和用來理解和說話的規則相同)屬於一種非常特定的規則，除非人類或者是機械儀器按照這些規則來處理接收到的句子，對於這些輸入的邏輯、形式的分析將會是不足的，因而導致不正確或者隨機的反應。當我們說規則必須內建於語法分析器時，我們設想存在一個器官，它具有特定結構的特性，或者換言之，具有特定的內在組織。In a certain sense all organisms are self-organizing systems. And, therefore, the question that faces us is, “What is the degree of freedom with which the specific organization necessary for language processing comes into being.” If the freedom were unlimited, the nature of man would unlimited in its capacities. This must be rejected for obvious reasons. There is no other organism with unlimited capacities and we no longer believe that man is different from other creatures in such fundamental ways. In fact, there is no possible way in which we could think of a device, natural or artificial, that is free from all structural limitations. At best we may assume that a certain mechanism has the capacity to organize itself in more than one way (that is, depending on certain conditions of input, it may eventually be operating in any one of a number of possible modes). This formulation makes it clear that in any case we must assume a biological matrix with specifiable characteristics that determines the outcome of any treatment to which the organism is subjected. Thus the search for innate properties is well within the scope biological inquiry.
在某種意義上，所有的有機體都是自我組織的系統。於是，我們面對的問題就是，”一個特定的組織得要有什麼樣的自由度，才能夠處理語言。”如果這項自由度沒有設限的話，那麼人類的天性會有無限的能力。這種情形基於一些很明顯的理由會被駁斥。世上沒有其他有機體具有無限制的能力，而我們也不再相信人類和其他生物有什麼根本上的不同。事實上，我們找不到可能的方法去設想出一個裝置能夠免於所有結構上的限制，無論其屬於自然或人工的。我們最多只能推想有某種機制，它有能力以不只一種方式來組織自己(也就是說，根據某些輸入的條件，它最終會以許多可能模式中的一種來運作)。這個構想說明了，在任何情況下，我們都必須假設有一個生物學的矩陣，它具有可加以特定的特徵，而這樣的特徵可以決定有機物所受的任何遭遇會有何結果。於是，對於內在能力的探索是包含在生物學研究的範圍之內。
訂閱：
文章 (Atom)