Evidence for HPCT - Hierarchy

[DagArchive]

[From Dag Forssell (2009.09.07 14:50]

[Bill Powers (2009.09.07.1221 MDT)]

I’m probably as astonished as anyone at the fit of the levels I proposed with Frans and Hetty’s data. I did notice one level that didn’t have a label from my series – and then realized that perhaps it should be called sensations, while the first level is intensities. See what Frans thinks.

I do not think so. Frans’s description of the mental capabilities of newborns is not pure PCT. He and Hetty wrote about instincts at birth which fade away in short order, among other things. As you can see from Frans’s PPT presentation, he takes information about brain development from several researchers. His chapter 3, the first to deal with a regression period, is titled: Wonder week 5: The World of Changing Sensations.

In my attachment, you will note my brief comment about newborns rooting around. As I recall Frans described this regarding chimps in the American Behaviorist article back around 1989. I found a Swedish book on breast feeding, translated from Norwegian, on a closeout table in Stockholm some years ago. It holds a two page spread with pictures of a baby placed on the mother’s belly, reaching the nipple in 40 minutes. (The description is purely in terms of reflex this and reflex that). The intensity level just won’t cut it, will it? It is temperature gradient that is the name of this game, not just any intensity. On August 13 I was featured speaker at http://www.blossombirth.org/blanket_babies.html. Chatting with volunteer mothers at this support group, they told me that they show videos that demonstrate the same thing.

My take on this is that Frans describes babies as being born capable of the sensation level (which sure makes sense to me), and explains the regression period at 5 weeks as an intermediate step to Wonder Week 8: The World of Patterns. I see no reason to question Frans’s call. The PPT presentation sure shows you how much care Frans and Hetty put into their adoption of HPCT as the framework for their presentation of baby brain development.

About two weeks ago, in a Skype call, Frans told me that a nurse in England, who works with preemies, had told him she had observed a regression period well before the due date. I have no details and am not sure Frans does either at this point, but this will be an interesting development as data become available.

Just recently, Frans’s daughter Xaviera, who is spearheading the development of a new and improved web site www.thewonderweeks.com (I will let you know when it goes live in a month or so) asked me to provide some text. I am attaching a Word document with her request and my reply.

She used 2) Short version. Considering the audience, I think that is the right call for a parenting website.

I am attaching the document for your reading of 1) Long version.

Let me know what you think.

Best, Dag

mental development.doc (69 Bytes)

[DagArchive]

[From Dag Forssell (2009.09.07 14:50]

[Bill Powers (2009.09.07.1221 MDT)]

I'm probably as astonished as anyone at the fit of the levels I
proposed with Frans and Hetty's data. I did notice one level that
didn't have a label from my series -- and then realized that perhaps
it should be called sensations, while the first level is
intensities. See what Frans thinks.

I do not think so. Frans's description of the mental capabilities of
newborns is not pure PCT. He and Hetty wrote about instincts at birth
which fade away in short order, among other things. As you can see
from Frans's PPT presentation, he takes information about brain
development from several researchers. His chapter 3, the first to
deal with a regression period, is titled: Wonder week 5: The World of
Changing Sensations.

In my attachment, you will note my brief comment about newborns
rooting around. As I recall Frans described this regarding chimps in
the American Behaviorist article back around 1989. I found a Swedish
book on breast feeding, translated from Norwegian, on a closeout
table in Stockholm some years ago. It holds a two page spread with
pictures of a baby placed on the mother's belly, reaching the nipple
in 40 minutes. (The description is purely in terms of reflex this and
reflex that). The intensity level just won't cut it, will it? It is
temperature gradient that is the name of this game, not just any
intensity. On August 13 I was featured speaker at
http://www.blossombirth.org/blanket_babies.html. Chatting with
volunteer mothers at this support group, they told me that they show
videos that demonstrate the same thing.

My take on this is that Frans describes babies as being born capable
of the sensation level (which sure makes sense to me), and explains
the regression period at 5 weeks as an intermediate step to Wonder
Week 8: The World of Patterns. I see no reason to question Frans's
call. The PPT presentation sure shows you how much care Frans and
Hetty put into their adoption of HPCT as the framework for their
presentation of baby brain development.

About two weeks ago, in a Skype call, Frans told me that a nurse in
England, who works with preemies, had told him she had observed a
regression period well before the due date. I have no details and am
not sure Frans does either at this point, but this will be an
interesting development as data become available.

Just recently, Frans's daughter Xaviera, who is spearheading the
development of a new and improved web site www.thewonderweeks.com (I
will let you know when it goes live in a month or so) asked me to
provide some text. I am attaching a Word document with her request
and my reply.

She used 2) Short version. Considering the audience, I think that
is the right call for a parenting website.

I am attaching the document for your reading of 1) Long version.

Let me know what you think.

Best, Dag

mental development.doc (26.5 KB)

[Bill_Powers1]

[From Bill Powers (2009.09.08.1144 MDT)]

Dag Forssell (2009.09.07 14:50] –

[Bill Powers (2009.09.07.1221
MDT)]

BP: I did notice one level that didn’t have a label from my series – and
then realized that perhaps it should be called sensations, while the
first level is intensities. See what Frans thinks.

DF: I do not think so. Frans’s description of the mental capabilities of
newborns is not pure PCT. He and Hetty wrote about instincts at birth
which fade away in short order, among other things. As you can see from
Frans’s PPT presentation, he takes information about brain development
from several researchers. His chapter 3, the first to deal with a
regression period, is titled: Wonder week 5: The World of Changing
Sensations.

Look at the first set of slides, page 31. This figure shows the levels
versus the weeks. At the lower left, there is an arrow labeled
Sensations, which starts at 0 weeks and goes on to the first step at 5
weeks.

I was just wondering whether that first period, from 0 to 5 weeks, should
correspond with intensities, and whether the first plateau. from 5 weeks
to 10 weeks (which is now unlabeled) should be Sensations. Perhaps not,
but then I wonder what that unlabeled plateau is – is there is missing
level? Or is the figure mislabeled? Should all the labels from
configuration on up be moved one step down?

Best,

Bill P.

[DagArchive]

[Dag Forssell (2009.09.08 11:55)]

Bill,

I understood your question, which you have now amplified by copying the image.

I tried to answer, but I see no evidence below that you recognized my answer. I think it unreasonable to suggest that babies are born with the ability to perceive intensities alone, when they (to me) so obviously control sensations.

I second the motion of asking what the second level is. Hetty and Frans described it in terms of smoothly changing sensations. On what evidence I have no idea. I do know that Frans is not very available at this time. There is nothing as such to say that there has to be a new level of perception just because there is a regression period.

Personally, I am comfortable leaving this alone for now.

I was impressed with the story around events and sequences. To me, this means that your question: “Should all the labels from configuration on up be moved one step down?” should be answered NO.

Best, Dag

···

[From Bill Powers (2009.09.08.1144 MDT)]

Dag Forssell (2009.09.07 14:50] –

[Bill Powers (2009.09.07.1221 MDT)]

BP: I did notice one level that didn’t have a label from my series – and then realized that perhaps it should be called sensations, while the first level is intensities. See what Frans thinks.

DF: I do not think so. Frans’s description of the mental capabilities of newborns is not pure PCT. He and Hetty wrote about instincts at birth which fade away in short order, among other things. As you can see from Frans’s PPT presentation, he takes information about brain development from several researchers. His chapter 3, the first to deal with a regression period, is titled: Wonder week 5: The World of Changing Sensations.

Look at the first set of slides, page 31. This figure shows the levels versus the weeks. At the lower left, there is an arrow labeled Sensations, which starts at 0 weeks and goes on to the first step at 5 weeks.

I was just wondering whether that first period, from 0 to 5 weeks, should correspond with intensities, and whether the first plateau. from 5 weeks to 10 weeks (which is now unlabeled) should be Sensations. Perhaps not, but then I wonder what that unlabeled plateau is – is there is missing level? Or is the figure mislabeled? Should all the labels from configuration on up be moved one step down?

Best,

Bill P.

[DagArchive]

[Dag Forssell (2009.09.08 11:55)]

Bill,

I understood your question, which you have now amplified by copying the
image.

I tried to answer, but I see no evidence below that you recognized my
answer. I think it unreasonable to suggest that babies are born with the
ability to perceive intensities alone, when they (to me) so obviously
control sensations.

I second the motion of asking what the second level is. Hetty and Frans
described it in terms of smoothly changing sensations. On what evidence I
have no idea. I do know that Frans is not very available at this time.
There is nothing as such to say that there has to be a new level of
perception just because there is a regression period.

Personally, I am comfortable leaving this alone for now.

I was impressed with the story around events and sequences. To me, this
means that your question: “Should all the labels from configuration
on up be moved one step down?” should be answered NO.

Best, Dag

···

[From Bill Powers
(2009.09.08.1144 MDT)]

Dag Forssell (2009.09.07 14:50] –

[Bill Powers (2009.09.07.1221
MDT)]

BP: I did notice one level that didn’t have a label from my series – and
then realized that perhaps it should be called sensations, while the
first level is intensities. See what Frans thinks.

DF: I do not think so. Frans’s description of the mental capabilities of
newborns is not pure PCT. He and Hetty wrote about instincts at birth
which fade away in short order, among other things. As you can see from
Frans’s PPT presentation, he takes information about brain development
from several researchers. His chapter 3, the first to deal with a
regression period, is titled: Wonder week 5: The World of Changing
Sensations.

Look at the first set of slides, page 31. This figure shows the levels
versus the weeks. At the lower left, there is an arrow labeled
Sensations, which starts at 0 weeks and goes on to the first step at 5
weeks.

I was just wondering whether that first period, from 0 to 5 weeks, should
correspond with intensities, and whether the first plateau. from 5 weeks
to 10 weeks (which is now unlabeled) should be Sensations. Perhaps not,
but then I wonder what that unlabeled plateau is – is there is missing
level? Or is the figure mislabeled? Should all the labels from
configuration on up be moved one step down?

Best,

Bill P.