Mental States Are Like Diseases

While Quine’s linguistic behaviorism is well-known, his Kant Lectures contain one of his most detailed discussions of behaviorism in psychology and the philosophy of mind. Quine clarifies the nature of his psychological commitments by arguing for a modest view that is against ‘excessively restrictive’ variants of behaviorism while maintaining ‘a good measure of behaviorist discipline…to keep [our mental] terms under control’. In this paper, I use Quine’s Kant Lectures to reconstruct his position. I distinguish three types of behaviorism in psychology and the philosophy of mind: ontological behaviorism, logical behaviorism, and epistemological behaviorism. I then consider Quine’s perspective on each of these views and argue that he does not fully accept any of them. By combining these perspectives we arrive at Quine’s surprisingly subtle view about behaviorism in psychology

THE IMPLICATION OF BEHAVIOURISM THEORY IN TEACHING GRAMMAR FOR ELEMENTARY STUDENTS

This paper attempts to discuss the implication of behaviorism theory in teaching grammar for elementary students. The behaviorism theory focused on the direct learning.Typical behavioristic models were Substitution Drills, Segmented Teaching, Modeling, Other behaviorist techniques. The elementary students are active and able to understand the meaning without understanding particular words. Teaching Grammar is not directly taught in the classroom, but the teacher integrates with vocabulary in statement, such as communicative question.We can conclude that in behaviorism theory can help to develop students to learn grammar in the foreign language, not by teaching grammar directly, but by imitating, repeatating also drilling

Revaluing the behaviorist ghost in enactivism and embodied cognition

Despite its short historical moment in the sun, behaviorism has become something akin to a theoria non grata, a position that dare not be explicitly endorsed. The reasons for this are complex, of course, and they include sociological factors which we cannot consider here, but to put it briefly: many have doubted the ambition to establish law-like relationships between mental states and behavior that dispense with any sort of mentalistic or intentional idiom, judging that explanations of intelligent behavior require reference to qualia and/or mental events. Today, when behaviorism is discussed at all, it is usually in a negative manner, either as an attempt to discredit an opponent’s view via a reductio, or by enabling a position to distinguish its identity and positive claims by reference to what it is (allegedly) not. In this paper, however, we argue that the ghost of behaviorism is present in influential, contemporary work in the field of embodied and enactive cognition, and even in aspects of the phenomenological tradition that these theorists draw on. Rather than take this to be a problem for these views as some have, we argue that once the behaviorist dimensions are clarified and distinguished from the straw-man version of the view, it is in fact an asset, one which will help with task of setting forth a scientifically reputable version of enactivism and/or philosophical behaviorism that is nonetheless not brain-centric but behavior-centric. While this is a bit like “the enemy of my enemy is my friend” strategy, as Shaun Gallagher notes (2019), with the shared enemy of behaviorism and enactivism being classical Cartesian views and/or orthodox cognitivism in its various guises, the task of this paper is to render this alliance philosophically plausible. Doi: 10.1007/s11229-019-02432-

The Behaviorisms of Skinner and Quine: Genesis, Development, and Mutual Influence

in april 1933, two bright young Ph.D.s were elected to the Harvard Society of Fellows: the psychologist B. F. Skinner and the philosopher/logician W. V. Quine. Both men would become among the most influential scholars of their time; Skinner leads the "Top 100 Most Eminent Psychologists of the 20th Century," whereas philosophers have selected Quine as the most important Anglophone philosopher after the Second World War.1 At the height of their fame, Skinner and Quine became "Edgar Pierce twins"; the latter obtaining the endowed chair at Harvard's department of philosophy, the former taking up the position at Harvard's psychology department.2Besides these biographical parallels, there also..

The cognitive revolution in Europe: taking the developmental perspective seriously

We can do little but to share Miller’s view [1] that cognitive psychology was born in the 1950s. However, his article distorts the role of psychology in the birth of cognitive science. On two occasions, Miller proposes that psychology could not play a role in the cognitive revolution because of its narrow focus on behaviorism

A Critical Review of Ian Barbour's Analysis of Discussions on the Mind/Body Problem

The concepts of mind, soul, and consciousness are key to an understanding of ourselves and how we interact with the universe around us. Ian Barbour names the mind/body problem as one of the major subjects of long-term discussion among religion, philosophy, and science, including cognitive psychology. However, his treatment of the traditional philosophical positions on this topic is wanting. What is most intriguing is that, after years of discussion, newer approaches to the mind/body problem seem to have come full circle, sharing many commonalities with the much older approach of property dualism

Overview of Learning Theories (Chapter 1 of Faith-Based Education that Constructs)

Virtually everyone would agree that the role of the school is to help students learn. The school, as an institution of education, must incorporate a sense of morality or values. This said, the methods of incorporating morality and values into education vary. This chapter explores three of the most common learning theories of the last fifty years: behaviorism, cognitivism, and constructivism. Each section will take a brief glance at the history, background, and definition of each of the theories. Then, the chapter will turn to the strengths and weaknesses of each of the theories, illuminating their role in supporting students\u27 learning. In addition, we will examine how these specific learning theories can be combined with faith in the classroom, in the home-school environment, and in other educational settings. Table 1.1 offers a summary of the three learning theories discussed in this chapter