"; *==== dynamic connectionist representation ====* " 0 0 "; describes an enriched account of competition between " 0 0 "; psychotherapy and social rehabilitation " 0 0 0 1 11 "; We enrich the network by providing pure social experience " 0 0 "; that will be explanitorilly related to both competing theories " 0 0 "; in that each theory suggests that the behaviors are not therapies " 0 0 5 10 "pure social experience" 10 10 "" 1 10 1 7 10 3 1 10 3 7 10 4 1 10 4 7 10 5 1 10 5 7 10 6 1 10 6 7 10 7 1 10 7 7 10 8 1 10 8 "; We add professional training and internship experience of the psychotherapist " 0 0 5 11 "psyho-analytic-training/internship" 10 11 "" 1 11 1 7 11 1 7 11 3 1 11 3 7 11 4 1 11 4 7 11 5 1 11 5 7 11 6 1 11 6 7 11 7 1 11 7 "; We add alternative professional training in internship experiences " 0 0 "; that identify experiences that are neither examplary of psychotherapy nor purely social " 0 0 5 12 "socio-environmental-training/internship" 10 12 "" 1 12 1 7 12 1 7 12 8 1 12 8 "; with the addition of a categorical positive valence " 0 0 "; favoring prohibition of dual roles on moral grounds " 0 0 "; this enriched model of bias associates pure social interaction " 0 0 "; rather than dual role. a negative link connects the valenced " 0 0 "; node to ENVIRONMENTAL ADJUSTMETS " 0 0 5 9 "no dual roles" 3 9 0.05 " ; 2 9 8 " 0 0 2 9 10 1 9 0 " ; we hypothesize that " 0 0 " ; actions of the body, e.g. production of cortisol, " 0 0 " ; adrenilin, etc. associated with affect, influence " 0 0 " ; the activation of neurons " 0 0 " ; But, we wish to first model coherence based reasoning independent " 0 0 " ; of emotional influences. So, there are no pathways by way of which " 0 0 " ; valence may flow in this example. " 0 0 5 0 "AFFECTIVE influence" 10 0 "" " ; two theories are to be entertained " 0 0 8 0 2 " ; we hypothesize that " 0 0 " ; if there is an independent world, that world will " 0 0 " ; influence the activation of neurons " 0 0 " ; if there is no independent world, a story needs to be " 0 0 " ; told about what source provides this degree of input " 0 0 " ; perhaps it is the influence of god or angels " 0 0 5 1 "WORLD influence" 10 1 "" " ; the model is silent on the ontological status of perceptions " 0 0 " ; materialist may interpret in a topic neutral way " 0 0 " ; dualist and epiphenomenalist may see qualia here " 0 0 " ; in any case this collection of nodes is excited when instances of " 0 0 " ; their corresponding object types are present " 0 0 " ; This is the the data, evidence, or observation to be accounted for " 0 0 5 2 "Exemplary THERAPY 2" 10 2 "" " ; ============= Hypotheses of initial Theory ================== " 0 0 " ; These nodes represent elements of Theory one " 0 0 5 3 "ID 3" 10 3 "T1" 5 4 "EGO 4" 10 4 "T1" 5 5 "SUPER-EGO 5" 10 5 "T1" 5 6 "TRANSFERENCE 6" 10 6 "T1" 5 7 "COUNTER-TRANSFERENCE 7" 10 7 "T1" " ; ============== coherence relations " 0 0 " ; co-hypotheses of a theory share the weight of their relevance " 0 0 " ; nodes 3, 4, and 5 together explain Evidence node 2 " 0 0 7 2 3 7 2 4 7 2 5 " ; nodes 6 and 7 are auxilary hypotheses that help to account for node 2 " 0 0 7 2 6 7 2 7 " ; nodes 6, and 7 together explain only on the assumption of 3, 4, 5 " 0 0 7 6 3 7 6 4 7 6 5 7 7 3 7 7 4 7 7 5 " ; =========== positive links between nodes of initial theory " 0 0 1 1 2 1 2 3 1 2 4 1 2 5 1 2 6 1 2 7 1 3 4 1 3 5 1 3 6 1 3 7 1 4 5 1 4 6 1 4 7 1 5 6 1 5 7 1 6 7 " ; ========== negative links between nodes of competing hypotheses " 0 0 2 8 3 2 8 4 2 8 5 2 8 6 2 8 7 " ; ============ Alternative Hypotheses =========== " 0 0 5 8 "ENVIRONMENT ADJUSTMENTS 8" 10 8 "T2" " ; ============== coherence relations " 0 0 " ; nodes 8 explains Evidence node 2 " 0 0 7 2 8 " ; =========== positive links between nodes of alternative theory " 0 0 1 2 8