|
Post by Smithee on Mar 21, 2012 17:52:39 GMT 10
Skinner also thought that he could build a perfect world if scientists were allowed to program people. Skinner proved how effective and pervasive social learning is. He recognized that any system of education will have consequences and recommended being mindful of the likely outcomes. “Society already possesses the psychological techniques needed to obtain universal observance of a code - a code which would guarantee the success of a community or state. The difficulty is that these techniques are in the hands of the wrong people - or, rather, there aren't any right people.” - B.F. Skinner “Society attacks early, when the individual is helpless. It enslaves him almost before he has tasted freedom. The 'ologies' will tell you how its done Theology calls it building a conscience or developing a spirit of selflessness. Psychology calls it the growth of the superego. Considering how long society has been at it, you'd expect a better job. But the campaigns have been badly planned and the victory has never been secured.” - B.F. Skinner He also recognised that our behaviour not being innate meant we are in control. “Some of us learn control, more or less by accident. The rest of us go all our lives not even understanding how it is possible, and blaming our failure on being born the wrong way.” - B.F. Skinner This is more liberating than the robot like programming of innate behaviours. I was taught to be cautious and I suggest caution is appropriate when we consider theories of human nature, which go in and out of vogue and which often carry with them disturbing agendas (e.g., women nurture, men rape, greed is good — learn to live with it).
|
|
|
Post by Smithee on Mar 21, 2012 18:06:06 GMT 10
He also recognised that our behaviour not being innate meant we are in control. “Some of us learn control, more or less by accident. The rest of us go all our lives not even understanding how it is possible, and blaming our failure on being born the wrong way.” - B.F. Skinner A winged, horned devil, a black pedestal, a naked male and female figure, chains, inverted pentagram. "The chains are loose. They can be slipped. The Devil’s own torch can light the way out and light the return, back to the surface." www.aeclectic.net/tarot/learn/meanings/devil.shtml
|
|
|
Post by Smithee on Mar 21, 2012 18:24:55 GMT 10
I am no bird; and no net ensnares me; I am a free human being with an independent will Charlotte Bronte(Born this day 1816)
|
|
|
Post by brandt on Mar 22, 2012 10:28:24 GMT 10
B.F. Skinner and "radical behavioralism." The entire school of thought has been trounced and replaced by the cognitive revolution. Skinner and colleagues used a few animal models to provide evidence for radical behaviorism. There were even a few that attempted to start businesses conditioning animals to do cute things for commercials. Unfortunately when the controls were removed the animal would just revert back to its nature.
Radical behaviorism demands that mind does not exist and if it does exist it can't be studied anyway because it can't be seen.
Another flaw in radical behaviorism was that it ignored behavior that occured absent any stimuli. Of course Skinner held firm to his belief that only radical behaviorism was adequate to the task of studying human behavior. There are been a lot of work since Skinner.
|
|
|
Post by Smithee on Mar 22, 2012 13:35:24 GMT 10
Your post demonstrates what Phillip meant by your basic ignorance of Psychology and other disciplines. You have constructed a straw man. Skinner was a founder of Cognitive Psychology. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_revolution"Response to behaviorism The cognitive revolution in psychology took form as cognitive psychology, an approach in large part a response to behaviorism, the predominant school in scientific psychology at the time. Behaviorism was heavily influenced by Ivan Pavlov and E. L. Thorndike, and its most notable early practitioner was John B. Watson, who proposed that psychology could only become an objective science were it based on observable behavior in test subjects. Methodological behaviorists argued that because mental events are not publicly observable, psychologists should avoid description of mental processes or the mind in their theories. However, B. F. Skinner and other radical behaviorists objected to this approach, arguing that a science of psychology must include the study of internal events [17]. As such, behaviorists at this time did not reject cognition (private behaviors), but simply argued against the concept of the mind being used as an explanatory fiction (rather than rejecting the concept of mind itself) [18]. Cognitive psychologists extended on this philosophy through the experimental investigation of mental states that allow scientists to produce theories that more reliably predict outcomes." They were Radical Behaviorists because they went beyond Behaviorism.
|
|
|
Post by brandt on Mar 22, 2012 14:05:08 GMT 10
My basic ignorance? Interesting. I could recommend a couple basic textbooks that could catch you to what has been happening over the last few decades. I assure you, my basic knowledge of psychology is fairly strong.
|
|
|
Post by Smithee on Mar 22, 2012 18:45:01 GMT 10
Yes your basic ignorance. Unlike you with your insult I gave a specific example of your ignorance which you have not rebutted. Interesting. I could recommend a couple basic textbooks that could catch you to what has been happening over the last few decades. I assure you, my basic knowledge of psychology is fairly strong. You are mistaken. You do not assure me. I have seen what you have posted so far and it has all been rubbish.
|
|
|
Post by Solomon on Mar 22, 2012 21:06:13 GMT 10
Your post demonstrates what Phillip meant by your basic ignorance of Psychology and other disciplines. 1. My comment was about a disregard of those disciplines within EP generally. 2. While your insult of Bro. Brandt was not worse than his insult of us, please let's stick to the subject matter from here on.
|
|
|
Post by brandt on Mar 23, 2012 4:54:38 GMT 10
"us"
|
|
|
Post by Tamrin on Mar 23, 2012 5:29:01 GMT 10
You had said: ... people [plural] that know very little and refuse to know. Who other than Smithee and I have been debating the subject here with you?
|
|