references to binary opposition in Pynchon's novels

[jbor]

>>>> [...] But in the domain of zero to one, not-something to something,
>>>> Pointsman can only possess the zero and the one. He cannot, like Mexico,
>>>> survive anyplace in between . Like his master I. P. Pavlov before him, he
>>>> imagines the cortex of the brain as a mosaic of tiny on/off elements. Some
>>>> are always in bright excitation, others darkly inhibited. The contours,
>>>> bright and dark, keep changing. But each point is allowed only the two
>>>> states: waking or sleep. One or zero. "Summation," "transition,"
>>>> "irradiation," "concentration ," "reciprocal induction" -- all Pavlovian
>>>> brain-mechanics - assumes the presence of these bi-stable points. But to
>>>> Mexico belongs the domain *between* zero and one -- the middle Pointsman
>>>> has
>>>> excluded from his persuasion -- the probabilities. [...] (_GR_, p. 55)

>> The behaviourist believes that all human reactions conform to the principle
>> of biological determinism. In the behaviourist paradigm there is no
>> distinction made between physiological and psychological reactions.
>
> Behaviorism as normally understood means that only the outward
> observable aspects of the psychological are studied. Inner,
> non-observable processes including consciousness are not dealt with.

This is inaccurate.

E.g. "The real question is not whether machines think but whether men do."
                                                (B.F. Skinner)

>> Mexico is still a scientist. But Pointsman realises that framing the
>> stimulus-response relationship in terms of probabilities, as Rog does,
>> rather than as certainties, poses a direct threat to the behaviourist
>> paradigm. There's no muddle about it.

***

>> In the behaviourist paradigm there is no
>> distinction made between physiological and psychological reactions.
> 
> Meaningless distinction really and who would bother to say otherwise.

Most people, actually. Hardly anyone still believes, as the behaviourists
did, that muscular reflexes and conscious behaviour are the same.

E.g. "As soon as questions of will or decision or reason or choice of action
arise, human science is at a loss." (Chomsky)

***

By the way, this is where the muddle is:

>>> Some subjects may respond in one way, some may exhibit
>>> seemingly opposite behavior, some may fall between the "extremes," and
>>> some animals may not respond at all. The one/zero responses of the
>>> individual cells are of course still going on in the animal subjects,
>>> but for purposes of writing up the experiment and drawing conclusions
>>> the zero/one business is meaningless.

best