> Is it easier to explain the pleasure of sexual stimulation in terms of
> "pleasure centres", genetically wired in to brain structure; or (as
> something which has to be _developed_) in terms of a (quasi-Pavlovian)
> association between the body-contact behaviour designed to reduce
> non-integrable stimuli, and genetically determined body structures which
> ensure that _body-contact_ is the particular mechanism which reduces the
> non-integrable stimuli?
>
Well. I guess that if we are after easy explanations, this is a reasonable
challenge..
But. . . .
> You have yet to elaborate the reason why non-integrable stimuli are
> noxious, and thereby to be avoided.
>
Notice, I never said -- never -- that non-integratable stimuli are noxious. I
said that non integratable stimuli set up preparation for effort.. Many people,
indeed, are fortunate enough to seek out non-integratable stimuli.
Perhaps it is a neat social construction to regard preparation for effort as
noxious...
e. g. "Don't tease (provide non integratable stimuli to) that kid.... it will
mess him/her up!!"
I quit -- it's bedtime...
Jim Mancuso
--
James C. Mancuso Dept. of Psychology
15 Oakwood Place University at Albany
Delmar, NY 12054 1400 Washington Ave.
Tel: (518)439-4416 Albany, NY 12222
Mailto:mancusoj@capital.net
http://www.crisny.org/not-for-profit/soi
A website dedicated to information on Italian-
American history and heritage.
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%