Sources for Skinner’s pragmatic selectionism in 1945

Abstract

Skinner's pragmatic selectionism shows up strongly in his 1945 publication, "The Operational Analysis of Psychological Terms," in which he introduced a probabilistic three-term contingency for verbal behavior. This probabilism was accompanied by an expanded contextualism and an increased emphasis on consequences with a clear alignment to pragmatism. In total, these changes represent Skinner's most striking shift from mechanistic and necessitarian values to pragmatic selectionism, and these changes may be indebted more to the conceptual contributions of others than Skinner acknowledged. Before 1945, Skinner made at least some positive associations with the views of Watson, Russell, and Carnap. From 1945 and afterwards, he strongly disassociated his views on verbal behavior from theirs. Before 1945, Skinner did not associate his views with those of Darwin or Peirce. After 1945, he strongly associated his views with those of Darwin and Peirce (in one published interview). No sources for his pragmatic selectionism, however, were referred to in 1945.

A study in the founding of applied behavior analysis through its publications

“…All three evolve, selected by consequences (Skinner, 1981). Today, a small literature on Skinner's development as a scientist and a systematist suggests that his 1938 book and 1945b article were also the products of practices selected by consequences (e.g., Coleman, 1991;Iversen, 1992;Moxley, 1992Moxley, , 1997Moxley, , 2001). Thus, his publications were not revolutionary in his own work but were continuous with it, even if they seemed revolutionary in psychology at the time (and more so today).…”

“…As for the founding and first publication in the discipline's philosophy of science, it was Skinner's (1945b) article, ''The Operational Analysis of Psychological Terms'' (Leigland, 1996;Moxley, 2001; see Day, 1969;Malone, 2009, p. 492;Pear, 2007, p. 134). In it, he made three contributions.…”

Relacionismo substancial: a ontologia do comportamento à luz do behaviorismo radical

“…Para esses autores, o behaviorismo 2 Entretanto, é importante ressaltar que essa conseqüência não é necessária. Moxley (2001aMoxley ( , 2001b2002a, 2002b, por exemplo, tem obra extensa sobre as relações entre o behaviorismo radical e o pragmaticismo de Peirce, mas o autor não defende a posição que definiremos adiante de "relacionismo radical". radical estaria fundado numa ontologia relacionista, de acordo com a qual a única propriedade relevante para a existência do comportamento é a própria relação que o define.…”

BEHAVIOR ANALYSIS AND ECOLOGICAL PSYCHOLOGY: PAST, PRESENT, AND FUTURE. A REVIEW OF HARRY HEFT'SECOLOGICAL PSYCHOLOGY IN CONTEXT

“…And, although a founder of pragmatism (James, 1907), his pragmatism sought truth more in personal coherence (interpretation) than in correspondence (prediction) or effective action (experimental control), the last of which was the criterion of truth advanced by Peirce (1878Peirce ( , 1905. Perhaps this is why Skinner, who followed Peirce in his pragmatism (Moxley, 2001(Moxley, , 2002, wrote so little about James. Indeed, the only substantive behavior-analytic treatment of James may be what Willard Day (1983) referred to as ''a relevant, if angry reference…by Malone relating James's concept of interest to Skinner's concept of reinforcement'' (p. 93; Malone, 1975; but see Bijou, 1969;Lindsley, 1969).…”

“…1 In applied behavior analysis, Barker's (1968) eco-logical psychology is among the foundations of ecobehavioral analysis (Morris & Midgley, 1990), one of the subdiscipline's variants (e.g., Lutzker & Campbell, 1994;Schroeder, 1990). In philosophical, theoretical, and conceptual analysis, ecological psychology's (a) subject matter is unmediated functional relations between organisms and their environments and (b) criterion of truth is pragmatic (Good, 2007;Noble, 1981), which they are, respectively, in behavior analysis (Krechevsky, 1939;Verplanck, 1954) and radical behaviorism (Moxley, 2001(Moxley, , 2002Zuriff, 1980). The prospects of reviewing Heft's book grew more enticing when I had the honor of meeting him at a reception hosted by Division 26 of the American Psychological Association-the Society for the History of Psychology.…”