On Jan 2, 11:31 am, "Jason (Memphis)" <[email protected]> wrote: Skinner is an > empiricist with rational tendencies; Chomsky is a rationalist with a > shaky empirical basis.
I enjoyed the the little I read by Sknner in his book "About Behaviorism," because his philosophy seemed to me to be heavily grounded in empiricism. Unfortunately, I have not read his book "Verbal Behavior." I have looked at summaries of Chomsky's cricism and just found an online version of the full essay. I plan to read it. Here is the link for anyone else who cares to look at it or even read it. http://www3.niu.edu/acad/psych/Millis/History/2003/cogrev.htm >From the summaries that I read, it seemed that although Skinner was typically grounded in observation about other types of behavior, his ideas about how language was acquired and used seems to ignore obvious observations. These reasons are not herd to understand. Unless the summaries do not reflect Chomsky's criticism accurately, or Chomsky is making straw man arguments against Skinner, then I have to side with Chomsky on this one, since he is the empiracist here, while Skiiner has somehow missed or else intentionally ignored certain aspects of language. Here is one summary of Chomsky's review. If I find that does not reflect the full review accurately, then I will make a post on that. http://www3.niu.edu/acad/psych/Millis/History/2003/cogrev.htm In 1958, Bernard Bloch, editor of Language, asked Chomsky to write a review of B.F. Skinner’s new book, Verbal Behavior, which had been published in 1957. Chomsky’s review, published in 1959, was highly critical. He argued that there is more to language learning than imitation and reinforcement. Important observations he offered were: 1.) There are an infinite number of sentences in any language; all possible sentences would be impossible to learn through imitation and reinforcement. 2.) Children acquire language quickly and effortlessly, and at identical stages across cultures. 3.) Words like goed, thinked, and eated are not spoken by parents; instead, children say these things because they over-generalize rules, such as this one for past tense. Chomsky asserted that children learn the rules of language, not just specific responses, as Skinner had proposed. He asserted that human beings are born biologically equipped to learn a language, and proposed his theory of a Language Acquisition Device (LAD) – an inborn mechanism or process that facilitates the learning of a language. According to the theory, the LAD consists of brain structures and neural wiring that are unique to human beings. In this nativist theory, humans are born with the ability to discriminate among phonemes, to fast-map morphemes, and to acquire the rules of syntax, and more. On Jan 2, 11:31 am, "Jason (Memphis)" <[email protected]> wrote: > I read the Jerry Fodor "How the mind works: What we still don't > know." > > In response to Fodor's statement, "Chomsky's reply was, in essense, > 'Don't be silly. Our behavior is characteristically caused by our > mental states; therefore, a serious psychology must be a theory about > what mental states exist and what roles they play in causing our > behavior. You can put gas in the tank because you believe that, if > you don't, the car will grind to a stop, and you don't want the car to > do so. How could anyone sane believe otherwise?" > > My response: > > 1. Don't be silly Fodor. Skinner wrote an entire chapter on covert > behavior (behaviors inside the skin) and verbal behavior (including > internal statements to yourself). Please, scientifically defined > these vague mental states that you mentioned--the vagueness is the > heart of the issue, that is, the accessiblity of these mental states > that you enjoy speculating about and passing these concepts off as > science. You obviously have never read Skinner extensively and are > basing your arguments on what Chomsky wrote. You mentioned Newtonian > physics on p. 87; therefore, making a statement such as behavior is > "caused by mental states" is inexcusable. After Newton, scientists > slowed down the unfruitful practice of such ideas as claiming that oak > wood burns hotter than pine wood because oakwood has more of the > mental state called anger (or oakwood is a more angry wood; or the > "essense" of oakwood is hotter). These mental states are just > "essenses" of complex biological organisms and Newton challenged that > unfruitful way of thinking. By the same token, scientists should not > decribe the aggressive behaviors of an animals (human animals too) by > statements of vague "anger" essenses but rather by explaining the > phyiological phenomonon (through biology) and environmental context > (through behavior analysis) which provokes or evokes that response. > Your "gasoline" [mental state] is ill-defined, vague, and "explanatory > fiction"--to borrow a Skinner term. > > 2. Skinner is not behavior analysis or behaviorism. He is just ONE > of many behavior analysts. Skinner himself acknowledged this while he > existed. He didn't even take credit for writing his own autobiography > that was just a product of the organism called B.F. Skinner and the > environment during his lifetime and environment that evolved life that > led to this structure called B.F. Skinner; he (according to himself) > had no choice writing his autobiography because he had no free will to > do otherwise. To me, that is a statement of humility. Some people > reject that statement because some of those people state if that is > true, people will have not accountability or personal responsibility > and the social fabric of society unravel. Consequences both postive > and negative; both inside and outside the organism (not accountability > or personal responsiblity) are more relevant to the control of > behavior. > > 3. You should read some of Skinner's books and understand his > arguments and data before you criticize those arguments and the data. > Then you should re-read Chomsky's response to Skinner. Skinner is an > empiricist with rational tendencies; Chomsky is a rationalist with a > shaky empirical basis. > > I wasn't very impressed with his reasons nor his arguments nor his > knowledge of Chomsky or Skinner. I would write more but lack the > time. > > Jason > > On Jan 2, 10:42 am, Clogtowner <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Hi y'all - I've printed out the first paper and I'll try to read it > > tonight and be there tomorrow. Hope you can make it Jason. > > > On Jan 1, 9:59 pm, "Jason (Memphis)" <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > It is at the Starbucks by the Malco Theater on Germantown Parkway (N. > > > 990 Germantown Pkwy, Cordova, TN) > > > > On Jan 1, 8:47 pm, "Liz Purkrabek" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Where is the book club this Saturday, Jason? > > > > > Liz > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: [email protected] > > > > > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Jason > > > > (Memphis) > > > > Sent: Thursday, January 01, 2009 8:06 PM > > > > To: Memphis Freethought Alliance > > > > Subject: Book Club This Saturday > > > > > This Saturday and next Saturday, Chris wanted us to review the > > > > following article. I will be heading back to Tennessee and am going > > > > to TRY to make it for book club. If I don't, I definitely will send > > > > Liz a happy birthday shout out! > > > > > How the Mind Works > > > > >www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/daed.2006.135.3.86 > > > > > Section One: Mind and Will & Section Three: Science and the Cosmos > > > > >www.infidels.org/library/modern/debates/great-debate.html > > > > > Jason- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Memphis Freethought Alliance" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/memphisfreethoughtalliance?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
