Is my case hopeless?

I saw an article Behaviorism in New World Encyclopedia - subtitled:
Organizing knowledge for happiness, prosperity and world peace

"Could be a great encyclopedia!" I thought but found Behaviorism much maligned and nothing
about world peace or prosperity, nor happiness. Still, the opening sentence I find - more or less -
acceptable:

'Behaviorism is an approach within psychology based on the proposition that behavior, human as well as
animal, can be researched scientifically and understood without recourse to inner mental states.'

I keep harping on:
the importance of enlarging operant chambers,
letting the animal subjects move around freely,
reviving and multiplying the cumulative records.

The data would help scientists talk more about being happy - or at least satisfied - because they
could show audiences how animals can be trusted to move in healthy directions, for instance:
towards water when thirsty; or, if houselights are too dim they might go and switch them on; or
should the temperature rise, they could operate an air conditioner ...  and so forth.
And animals would shun - not touch anything painful - unless forced to.
And then this would not fit the description of free-operant conditioning.

Behavior scientists could also establish new - or rather "old" knowledge As Old As The Hills.
Reinforcement attracts us from a distance!
Having experienced what things mean, we don't always have to smell, touch or taste them to know
we want them. Like other animals with audio-visual senses, we too can literally see and hear things coming from afar, or perceive them receding further away from ourselves ... and others.

Moreover, when drawing them to a key with food, the experimental animals stay stationary in that
place in order to eat.  Outside lab settings this is apparent to the naked eye: food being within reach
individuals stop moving and body parts begin moving quickly ... a strengthening process ...
And that is precious and healthy. And valid, refreshing or enlightening knowledge to spread.

Hence my answer to, Is my case hopeless? is a definite denial: There is hope yet.
The potential of cumulative curves, as unique research tools, has yet to be recognised worldwide.

As for the sentence from the encyclopedia, my position is: scientists and non-scientists can respect
'inner mental states' as effects instead of causes and also take physiological results more seriously.
In Pavlov's experimental analysis what the dogs saw, heard AND inferred made them drool AND
energized the gland. The data imply brain cells participate; and if so, the entire neuro-muscular
system is inevitably directly affected by environmental factors ... even a long distance beyond the
body of an individual.
Which again brings up my case for extending the /time - space/ dimensions ... so a boader view of
the experimental stage will be presented ... like moving back to follow subjects better in the centre!
They say cumulative recorders now exist only as museum pieces. Designing  recording instruments
with four pens, for one rat, from 4 places, might suffice for rescuing Skinner's wonderful
scientific legacy, and getting it right ... again.

June 27, 2012