Subject: From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>

From: [email-masked]
Date: Sun, 5 May 85 11:42:11 edt

Received: from sri-ai.arpa by csnet-relay.arpa id a020487; 5 May 85 4:21 EDT
Date: Sat  4 May 1985 22:52-PDT
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA  94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest   V3 #56
To: AIList@SRI-AI
Received: from rand-relay by vpi; Sun, 5 May 85 11:34 EST

AIList Digest             Sunday, 5 May 1985       Volume 3 : Issue 56

Today's Topics:
  Emotions and Memory
  Emotional Attachment
  Emotional Attachment
  Cognitive dissonance
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 2-May-85
From: [email-masked]
Subject: Emotions and Memory

Hello,
  My name is Wolf-Dieter Batz. I'm a Psychologist working at a
software advisory board at the University of Heidelberg. This
is my request to be put on the AIList.

My special interest, which is also the basis for this request,
lies in the metatheoretical aspects of memory research. In my
thesis "About Model Construction in Memory Research", I investigated
several theories about memory for their essential characteristics;
theories were selected from Cognitive Science, Artificial Intelligence,
and Neuroscience. Results indicated a number of questionable
fundamentals in memory research. If anybody is interested in them
I would like to get feedback.

A very newborn idea in this context is to establish a new theory
of emotions that is structurally related to a still-to-formulate
theory of memory.  I would be very glad for responses to this idea. -
Everybody's invited!

Kind regards - mit freundlichen Gruessen ***

                                 Wolf-Dieter Batz

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 25 Apr 85 09:28:33 pst
From: ed298-aa%ucbjade.CC@Berkeley
Subject: Emotional Attachment

  [I'll permit this message, not as another "rape" piece, but
  as it relates to the Minsky/Batali/Carter discussion of human
  emotional mechanisms.  -- KIL]

Having finally become quite weary reading abstract theorizing about rape (b
(brought on by the posting of a dumb story I remember first hearing in
high school), I'll add some down-to-earth comments.  I won't try to link
this to AI issues; I don't think it works that way, and I feel somewhat
strange addressing this on this bb, but it seems appropriate to offer some
first-hand information and "introspection.'

I've been raped, and I've worked on a rape crisis line, counseling rape
survivors.  I've never run across anyone agonizing because of an instant
"attachment" of some kind to the rapist.  Many women are raped by men they
know; in this situation indeed there can be very complicated feelings.  But
the strongest feeling I remember, and one which I've heard expressed by
other women, is the world-altering loss of trust and security after any
kind of rape.  Rape is a act of violence and a robber of power; one who
previously feels ok about something as mundane as walking down the street
may no longer be able to leave the house, or only with the greatest fear
and mistrust.  The attitude, which is changing but still strong, that a woman
who is raped has somehow brought it on herself is enough to add feelings of
shame and self-hate to the complex of fear.

I don't find anything funny about jokes on rape, or any other form of
humiliation or violence.  There is a great deal of work to be done to
transform our communities, and society, into a place where rape is not
tolerated, indeed, is viewed as something as incredible as cannibalism
or any other barbarism of the past.  Calling people on rape "jokes" is one
thing which can be done, perhaps you all can think of other more stronger
steps to take.

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 25 Apr 1985  16:22 EST
From: [email-masked]
Subject: Emotional Attachment

Bob Carter has answered Batali's objections
to my "assault" theory better than I would have.  Thanks.
-- minsky

------------------------------

Date: Thu 2 May 85 17:58:22-PDT
From: [email-masked]
Subject: Cognitive dissonance

  I am offended by Mr. Carter's views on the subject of rape, that the anxiety
of the victim is caused by her "cognitive dissonance when the attachment
machinery begins to operate...".  Although this might in some sense be true,
it is not the whole truth, and I cannot remain indifferent to what is to me
such a dangerous statement.

Anxiety is indeed caused by cognitive dissonance, but the conflict is between
our opinion of the world, and our perception of reality.  We must have a valid
model of our world in order to survive--there is an incredibly basic drive in
human nature to make sense of it all.  And, given a conflict between our
concepts and our perceptions, it is usually the concepts that win out.  our
perceptions, our evaluations of what is occurring, are twisted to align with
our model of the world, so that we do not have to bear fully the psychic shock
of having our basic assumptions undermined.  This accounts for the human
reactions of denial, repression, regression, rationalization, and other
defense mechanisms, when confronted with the occurrence of a crisis.

The most basic assumptions have to do with the meaning of life, the question
of evil, the assumption of causality, and the myth of invulnerability.  These
are the foundations on which general behavior is based.  After defining and
discussing these concepts, I will come back to how they apply in the case of
a rape.
  Each person has his own meaning of life.  A great many people have not
formulated it explicitly, but everyone has a vague sense of purpose, a reason
for living; everyone has a sense that it means something to be alive, and that
it does all make sense somehow, even if we don't understand it.  (Note that
knowledge of the existence of purpose does not require knowledge of the
purpose.)  This is one of the great things theology gives us, that we do have
a reason for being here.  If there were no reason, if there were no sense of,
"I should stay alive because someday something might happen", then there would
be no reason to get out of bed in the morning, to eat, to love.  Starving to
death takes too long; aspirin is relatively quick and soft, although some
people prefer more violent ways of ending their existence.  The fact that we
are saddened and outraged when a person commits suicide indicates that we
believe that he had a purpose.
  The reality of evil is a problem that most people cope with by ignoring it
or denying that it exists.  We like to think that the world is basically a nice
place, that people are generally decent and reasonable, and that you can
generally count on them not to do evil acts.  Although this must be the basis
for social interaction and trust, we get into the habit of believing, because
we are fortunate enough no to encounter evil in the world, that there is no
evil in the world(1).
  People in general, and especially computer scientists, like to believe in
causality.  Things happen for reasons.  If you can know the reasons, then you
can understand the event, and predict it or modify it.  This implies that you
have the power to determine your own life, and that you are therefore
responsible for what happens, which is a pernicious lie(2).  Remorseful people
feel, "If only I'd have done things differently, this wouldn't have
happened...".  The fact is that they acted in the best way they knew how at
the time, and they cannot be held responsible for something they didn't know
how to do; furthermore, things may *not* have happened differently if their
actions had changed.  Finally, there might not BE a reason for an occurrence,
in a fundamental sense it "just happened".
  The myth of invulnerability says that I have always been alive as long as I
can remember, and therefore, at a very deep level, I always will be alive.
Bruce Lee never dies in the movies.  Sure, other people die of cancer, other
people get divorced, other people go through the windshield when they drive
after drinking or don't fasten their seatbelts, other people get raped,
but it's not REALLY going to happen to ME.  The myth of invulnerability allows
us to continue to live and function in a modern world while threatened with
everything from nuclear annihilation down to robberies next door, without
becoming completely paranoid and dysfunctional.

Given this framework of beliefs held by people in general, let us now examine
the rape victim.  She is directly and violently confronted with a reality that
goes against her deepest assumptions; there is no place to hide (successfully)
from her perceptions by repression or denial.  A rape is a violent act of
violation that has no inherent meaning; if such senseless things occur as
*reality*, then maybe life has no meaning after all.  Rape is one of the
ultimate evils.  The rape victim is directly confronted with an experience of
undeniable evil; she must completely revise her opinions of the basic nature
of mankind and men, what she now believes will happen in the future from a
given situation, and how far she can trust people.  The rape victim is
confronted with a random act that does not make sense, that she realistically
could not change or stop from happening.  Yet, she still feels that maybe it
happened because of something she did, maybe if she somehow had done something
different that it wouldn't have happened.  Not only must she deal with these
feelings, but she must accept the horrifying concept that causality does not
apply at some times.  Finally, the rape victim has something terrible happen
directly to her, something that she cannot ignore, that shatters her illusion
of invulnerability.  She must directly confront the fact of her own mortality
at a gut level, something that most of us are unable to do completely.

  Again, it is not these emotions or concepts per se that are so difficult to
deal with; it is the fact that they are completely opposed to the current
belief structure of the victim, which is the basis for survivability.  She is
forced to somehow integrate these new values into her beliefs.  She cannot
survive with her old beliefs; she has no way of knowing whether
she will survive with her new beliefs, and so her survivability is seriously
within question.  I argue that the cognitive dissonance created in the victim
by attempting to integrate any one of these four areas into her belief
structure is a stronger and more probable explanation for anxiety than a
theoretical "attachment bond" to the attacker.  I also feel that the
"attachment bond" theory is open to distortion, and could promote
significantly unhealthy attitudes in the population at large (e.g., "she really
loves it", "it's not the rapist's fault", etc.)

Finally, I would like to again call attention to the concept of homosexual
rape.  This is a reality that people do not like to think or talk about.  Male
computer scientists are not immune to being raped, and I strongly believe that
considering the concept of it happening to YOU puts things in a much different
perspective than the abstract idea of it happening to some woman.  In such a
situation, you would be given the same choice:  submit or die.  I hope you
find such an idea extremely offensive and revolting.  RAPE, IN GENERAL, IS.

Notes:
(1)  Proving the existence of evil raises disturbing fundamental questions
about the existence or direction of purpose in life.
(2)  Paradoxically, the concept that you do not have the power to determine
your own life, and that you are not responsible for what happens to you,
is also a pernicious lie.  The Theater of the Absurd is based on this concept.

------------------------------

End of AIList Digest
********************