therealresistance (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

Skinner also never denied the existence of cognitive process. He was interested in a behavioural analysis of cognition and internal states. This is documented from 1945 onwards. The problem with cognitive processes is that they are responses in and of themselves. They are therefore dependent variables and not independent variables. Skinner did recognise their importance but not as ultimate causal factors.

therealresistance (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

This is accounted for by relation frame theory, a an empirically valid post Skinnerian yet still opernat account of language and cognition

therealresistance (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

Skinner was never a black box or blank slate proponent. He was a Dawrininst and recognised the combined effects of evolution, current physiology/genetics and their interaction with the environment.

therealresistance (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

a good point. I was being to loose with the word "behaviour". You are right that there are unconditioned responses and those under antecedent influence. How very careless of me.

Zeldovich (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

It's not a joke. I'm absolutely serious. I don't think Skinner even developed a mathematical formula for learning.

Zeldovich (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

Bruxing, breathing, pupil dilation... All can be influenced by learning, but will occur anyway under proscribed circumstances. There is such a thing as unconditioned responses.

biglmac (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

3:20, wow. Nice quote.

biglmac (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

Is that a joke? Cause it sucks.

flybybutterflies (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

BF Skinner RULES!!! Cognitive psychology die!!! WOOHOO!! haha. =P

boredtodeath88 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

come onnnnnnnnn you can barely see the subtitles!