Despite not understanding what they were getting at, I used to admire scientists for the way they use so many abstract terms. Behaviorists changed that for me. B.F.Skinner was the first scientist whose writing totally amazed me.
For instance, he depicts a 'sound effect' of verbalisation:
being thirsty, you say 'my-eem' and a glass of water comes floating through the air towards you!
['my-eem' is the Hebrew word "מיים", meaning water]
Skinner called those episodes 'manding':
saying what one wants (eg. "I need a pen" or "Please pass the salt") and ... like magic ... the wish is fulfilled by another speaker who listens.
His 'functional' conceptualisation of language is as enlightening for me today as when I first read it, circa 45 years ago. I had never read anything so plain and simple and important about language before.
The point is: It Takes Two To Tango.
being thirsty, you say 'my-eem' and a glass of water comes floating through the air towards you!
['my-eem' is the Hebrew word "מיים", meaning water]
Skinner called those episodes 'manding':
saying what one wants (eg. "I need a pen" or "Please pass the salt") and ... like magic ... the wish is fulfilled by another speaker who listens.
His 'functional' conceptualisation of language is as enlightening for me today as when I first read it, circa 45 years ago. I had never read anything so plain and simple and important about language before.
The point is: It Takes Two To Tango.
We must observe persons at least 2 by 2, if we want to know how they affect each other, verbally;
and 'observe' includes looking and listening from some distance away: no pushing ... no touching.
NOTE! That was originally posted on January 5, 2011.
Today is May 24, 2011, and I just revised the last two lines; they appear realistic.
Skinner, too, changed his thinking by returning to words he'd written in the past:
"I see other implications and relations. I had thought that something of the same sort would happen when other people read these papers. They would add things which occurred to them because of their special interests and special knowledge, and a joint contribution would be possible. Too often this has not happened. The misunderstandings triggered by my papers apparently did not suggest further implications to many commentators.
Why have I not been more readily understood? Bad exposition on my part? All I can say is that I worked very hard on these papers, and I believe they are consistent one with another. The central position, however, is not traditional, and that may be the problem. To move from an inner determination of behavior to an environmental determination is a difficult step. Many governmental, religous, ethical, political, and economic implications might also have been considered, but most of the contributions do not venture that far afield." (1984)
Again Skinner raises my morale, lightens my load, reminds me why I am a 'radical' behaviorist.
The pivotal issue is still the same:
moving from internal to environmental causes for the behavior of organisms.
Pavlov started this by showing audio-visual stimuli affecting a gland ... hence also the brain and the nerves ... from a distance beyond the body of each experimental subject.
Skinner named that respondent conditioning. I feel like making a speech:
Ladies and Gentlemen! Readers and Speakers! Scientists and Professors!
By chance I saw a mobile rat with the aid of imagined cumulative records.
From that time to this, my 'functional' description of language has widened and I can only suggest you assess this phenomenal instrument for yourselves and your students, in some library or classroom, with convenient access to past and contemporary literature, journals and chapters and Google and all.
Before you decide anything I think you could design your simulated graphs with your own hand.
Thank you very much for your attention.
July 5, 2012
and 'observe' includes looking and listening from some distance away: no pushing ... no touching.
NOTE! That was originally posted on January 5, 2011.
Today is May 24, 2011, and I just revised the last two lines; they appear realistic.
Skinner, too, changed his thinking by returning to words he'd written in the past:
"I see other implications and relations. I had thought that something of the same sort would happen when other people read these papers. They would add things which occurred to them because of their special interests and special knowledge, and a joint contribution would be possible. Too often this has not happened. The misunderstandings triggered by my papers apparently did not suggest further implications to many commentators.
Why have I not been more readily understood? Bad exposition on my part? All I can say is that I worked very hard on these papers, and I believe they are consistent one with another. The central position, however, is not traditional, and that may be the problem. To move from an inner determination of behavior to an environmental determination is a difficult step. Many governmental, religous, ethical, political, and economic implications might also have been considered, but most of the contributions do not venture that far afield." (1984)
Again Skinner raises my morale, lightens my load, reminds me why I am a 'radical' behaviorist.
The pivotal issue is still the same:
moving from internal to environmental causes for the behavior of organisms.
Pavlov started this by showing audio-visual stimuli affecting a gland ... hence also the brain and the nerves ... from a distance beyond the body of each experimental subject.
Skinner named that respondent conditioning. I feel like making a speech:
Ladies and Gentlemen! Readers and Speakers! Scientists and Professors!
By chance I saw a mobile rat with the aid of imagined cumulative records.
From that time to this, my 'functional' description of language has widened and I can only suggest you assess this phenomenal instrument for yourselves and your students, in some library or classroom, with convenient access to past and contemporary literature, journals and chapters and Google and all.
Before you decide anything I think you could design your simulated graphs with your own hand.
Thank you very much for your attention.
July 5, 2012
No comments:
Post a Comment