Re: Challenge to the behaviourists #2
From: Glen M. Sizemore (gmsizemore2_at_yahoo.com)
Date: 09/11/04
- Next message: r norman: "Re: DNA and the neuron"
- Previous message: johnlawrencereed: "johnreed take 1.2"
- In reply to: JPL Verhey: "Re: Challenge to the behaviourists #2"
- Next in thread: patty: "Re: Challenge to the behaviourists #2"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: 11 Sep 2004 11:25:13 -0700
C'mon Vern, this is just that simplistic conditioning stuff and a few
> drug effects on simplistic conditioning stuff. Why, with your
> sophisticated knowledge of the really complex stuff, this should be a
> breeze.
JV: So I must assume that the behaviorist elite needed perform all
those
experiments to find out, just because they are too stupid to predict
the
obvious right away.
GS: If the outcomes are obvious, you should be able to tell me what
they are.
JV: Maybe that's why their status has declined ever since.
GS: No, the scant attention paid by many to behaviorism is very much
like the scant attention paid to Darwinism by fundamentalists.
JV: But I'm interested in the results of those particular pigeoneqsue
experiments and their conclusions.
GS: What are the outcomes, and how would you predict them?
"JPL Verhey" <matterDELminds@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<414197c2$0$62374$5fc3050@dreader2.news.tiscali.nl>...
- Next message: r norman: "Re: DNA and the neuron"
- Previous message: johnlawrencereed: "johnreed take 1.2"
- In reply to: JPL Verhey: "Re: Challenge to the behaviourists #2"
- Next in thread: patty: "Re: Challenge to the behaviourists #2"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
