Behaviorism: Laws Of The Observable

Behaviorism: Laws of theObservable

The Backdrop to Watson: Functionalismat the Univ. of ChicagoJohn Dewey, like James, was influencedby both Peirce and DarwinMoved to the University of Chicago in1894, bringing George Herbert Mead,Addison W. Moore, and JamesRowland AngellContrast with structuralism: rejected elementarismRejected the reflex arc in favor of more holistic, adaptiveview: a reflex is an instrument “for successful coordination”

Angell’s Characterization of Functionalism"Functional psychology.involves the.effort to discern and portray thetypical operations of consciousness under actual life conditions, as overagainst the attempt to analyze and describe its elementary and complexcontents.It is.synonymous with descriptions and theories of mentalaction as distinct from the material of mental constitution. The mostessential quarrel which the functionalist has with structuralism in itsthoroughgoing and consistent form.touches the feasibility and worth ofthe effort to get at mental process as it is under the conditions of actualexperience rather than as it appears to a merely post mortemanalysis.The functional psychologist.is wont to take his cue from thebasal conception of the evolutionary movement, i.e., that for the mostpart organic structures and functions possess their present characteristicsby virtue of the efficiency with which they fit into the extant conditionsof life broadly designated the environment.“ (Angell, 1907)

Ivan Petrovich Pavlov: PhysiologistIn vivo study of the physiology of thedigestive system using fistulasRole of nervous system in controllingdigestive processesInvestigated “psychic secretion”—secretion in response to foodstimuli located at a distanceTreated phenomenon as a reflex, albeit a conditioned one.These reflexes involve the cerebral cortexunconditioned stimulus unconditioned responseconditioned stimulus conditioned response“The Experimental Psychology and Psychopathology ofAnimals” (1903)

James WatsonFrustration at the University of ChicagoDominated by FunctionalistsSought refuge in Jacques Loeb andhis studies of tropism in plants andanimalsDissertation on the relation between behavior in the white ratand the growth of the nervous systemTitle: Animal Education: The Psychical Development ofthe White RatEmerging view: “Can't I find out by watching.[animal]behavior everything that the other students are finding out byusing [human] O[bserver]s?"

Watson’s Manifesto: “Psychology as theBehaviorist Views It”Rejected focus on consciousness and use of introspectionFocus instead on behavior, with emphasis on control andpredictionThinking as covert speech—thus the product of conditioningStarted with animals, but moved to humansLittle Albert study: “conditionand control the emotions ofhuman subjects.”Classical conditioning of fear

Edward Thorndike: The Law of EffectThorndike’s puzzle box:Animals, generally hungrycats, were placed in thebox. To escape they had tosolve the puzzle.Observed trial and error learning. Cat would try variousstrategies until one worked. On repeat trials, gradually reducetime to respond. Not insight but successful strategies gradually“stamped in.”Law of Effect: successful behaviors led to stronger neuralconnections.

Development in Philosophy:Logical PositismConcerned about the epistemological status of new scientific(and possibly pseudo-scientific) developments in the early 20thcentury, several philosophers sought to explicate thefoundations of scienceIn sensory experience (positive knowledge)And in logicLogic provided the way to build from sensory experience toscientific theoriesHypothetical-Deductive Method: Theories are hypothesestested by the statements derived from them

Learning Theory: Clark HullBroad early interests: effects of tobacco,hypnosis, intelligent machines“It has struck me many times of late thatthe human organism is one of the mostextraordinary machines – and yet amachine. And it has struck me more thanonce that so far as thinking processes go,a machine could be built which would doevery essential thing that the body does(except grow) as far as concerns thinking,etc.” (Idea Book, 1926)

Laws of LearningQuest for a mathematical account of learningLooking for laws by use of the hypothetical-deductivemethodIntervening variables fine as long as well-defined.

Edward Tolman: Purposive BehaviorismArgued for a molar, not molecularperspective (reflexes, S-R pairs aremolecular)Articulated an intervening variable theoryof learning, not a stimulus-response theoryAnimals and humans engage in latentlearning: build up knowledge of theirenvironment from engaging theenvironment rats running mazes—with andwithout rewards—developedcognitive maps if rat learns to go from A to B,where will it go when releasedfrom C?

Burrhus Frederic Skinner and hisEpistemologyOperational definition of psychologicalterms—tie them to what can beexperiencedInitially construed this as ruling out anymental (subjective) entities—radicalbehaviorismLater developed a strategy for talkingabout the inner subjective life: “The ironyis that while Boring must confine himselfto an account of external behavior, I amstill interested in Boring-from-within.”

Skinner’s Treatment of Private MentalLivesBut what are mental events for Skinner? Certainly they arephysical, but what do we know of them?How can we talk about them? Learn language by havingwords brought under stimulus control. But those teaching usour language cannot observe events in our private lives so as tolink our responses to them. Limited to what is public.“It is social reinforcement which leads the individual to knowhimself. It is only through the gradual growth of the verbalcommunity that the individual becomes ‘conscious’. Hecomes to see himself only as other see him, or at least only asothers insist that he see himself.”

Mental Events: Treat as Effects, notCausesSuppose mental events were intervening steps in thecausal pathway from stimulus to responseStimulus Mental Events ResponseMental events (1) are not observable and (2) notindependently controllableControllability important both for experimentation and forclinical use. If you cannot control it, it is not a worthyfocus of “scientific” inquiry

Skinner’s use of the Theoretician’sDilemmaUses Theoretician’s Dilemma to argue against theories positingtheoretical entities:“The objection to inner states in not that they do not exist, butthat they are not relevant in a functional analysis. . . . Unlessthere is a weak spot in our causal chain so that the second linkis not lawfully determined by the first, or the third by thesecond, then the first and third links must be lawfully related”If Stimulus Mental Events Responsethen Stimulus Response

How could mental events be more thanidle intermediates in causal chain?If they are the product of multiple causes.Previous learning historyStimulus Mental Event ResponseRecent history (including recent mental events)Can no longer be eliminated without losing predictivepower

Is Skinner surreptitiously invokingintentional idioms?Dennett:Skinner’s experimental design is supposed to eliminate theintentional, but it merely masks it. Skinner’s nonintentionalpredictions work to the extent they do, not because Skinnerhas truly found nonintentional behavioral laws, but becausethe highly reliable intentional predictions underlying hisexperimental situations (the rat desires food and believes . .) are disguised by leaving virtually no room in theenvironment for more than one bodily motion to beappropriate action and by leaving virtually no room in theenvironment for discrepancy to arise between the subject’sbeliefs and the reality.”

Skinner’s Innovation: OperantsSkinner rejects S-R psychology, which focuses only on bringingexisting responses under the control of new stimuli. How do newresponses arise?Turns to Thorndike’s Law of Effect Behaviors that are reinforced increase in probability Those that are not reinforced decrease in probabilityRejects Thorndike’s construal as trial and error—too cognitive(errors as intentional acts in the attempt to solve a problem) anddoesn’t emphasize the role of reinforces increasing the probabilityof any behavior that elicits them.By putting the emphasis on behavior as being shaped byconsequences (a la Darwin), Skinner was a functionalist, but verydifferent from the mentalistic functionalists like James

Shaping and Complex BehaviorsShaping:Begin by reinforcing a behavior that is only remotelysimilar to the target. Then reinforce variants of it thatare closer to the target.Verbal behaviorSkinner was well aware that language was the humanbehavior that had to be explained by an adequate psychologyProposed that if words counted as stimuli and reinforcers,could develop an operant theory of language use.Object of Chomsky’s scathing review.

Skinnerian UtopiasWhat are some good things to do once we understand whatcauses behavior? Remove reinforcers that promote conflict Remove reinforcers that promote inequality anddiscriminationIf human life, including the unhappy parts of human life, arethe product of the histories of reinforcement individuals havereceived, then it is irresponsible not to arrange thesereinforcers, as much as possible, so as to make human lifehappier.But why these “enlightenment” ends? Was he conditioned toadvance those ends?

intentional idioms? Dennett: Skinner's experimental design is supposed to eliminate the intentional, but it merely masks it. Skinner's nonintentional predictions work to the extent they do, not because Skinner has truly found nonintentional behavioral laws, but because the highly reliable intentional predictions underlying his