Graduate studies at Western
Behavior and Philosophy 35:1 - 55 (2007)
|Abstract||Two of the leading contenders to explain behavior are radical behaviorism and intentionality: an account that seeks to confine itself to descriptions of response–environment correlations and one that employs the language of beliefs and desires to explicate its subject matter. While each claims an exclusive right to undertake this task, this paper argues that neither can be eliminated from a complete explanatory account of human behavior. The behavior analysis derived from radical behaviorism is generally sufficient for the prediction and control of behavior in the laboratory and its applications, but it fails to provide an explanation of behavior since it cannot deal with the personal level of explanation, the continuity of behavior, and the delimitation of behaviorist interpretations. Only the inclusion of intentional terms can achieve these ends. An intentional account cannot succeed, however, without the incorporation of a behavioral criterion for the ascription of intentional content based on the analysis of systematic environment–behavior relationships. This paper proposes an overarching philosophical framework for the analysis and interpretation of behavior that incorporates both radical behaviorism and intentional psychology in a model, "intentional behaviorism," that additionally links the explanation of behavior to neuroscience and evolutionary psychology. Finally, the paper proposes a link between the philosophical framework of intentional behaviorism and the world of empirical science by describing a tentative model of research, "super-personal cognitive psychology," that shows how the disparate elements previously discussed impinge upon psychological investigation.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Hugh Lacey (2007). Intentional Behaviorism and the Intentional Scheme: Comments on Gordon R. Foxall's "Intentional Behaviorism". Behavior and Philosophy 35:101 - 111.
François Tonneau (2007). Behaviorism and Chisholm's Challenge. Behavior and Philosophy 35:139 - 148.
J. Moore (2007). Comments on "Intentional Behaviorism" by G. R. Foxall. Behavior and Philosophy 35:113 - 130.
Gordon R. Foxall (1999). The Contextual Stance. Philosophical Psychology 12 (1):25-46.
Max Hocutt (2007). Gordon Foxall on Intentional Behaviorism. Behavior and Philosophy 35:77 - 92.
Karel J. Lambert (1978). The Place of the Intentional in the Explanation of Behavior: A Brief Survey. Grazer Philosophische Studien 6:75-84.
Fred A. Keijzer (2005). Theoretical Behaviorism Meets Embodied Cognition: Two Theoretical Analyses of Behavior. Philosophical Psychology 18 (1):123-143.
Lisa Bortolotti (2004). Can We Interpret Irrational Behavior? Behavior and Philosophy 32 (2):359 - 375.
Howard Rachlin (2007). A Behavioral Science of Mental Life: Comments on Foxall's "Intentional Behaviorism". Behavior and Philosophy 35:131 - 138.
José E. Burgos (2007). About Aboutness: Thoughts on Intentional Behaviorism. Behavior and Philosophy 35:65 - 76.
Beth Preston (1994). Behaviorism and Mentalism: Is There a Third Alternative? Synthese 100 (2):167-96.
Constantine Sandis (2008). Dretske on the Causation of Behavior. Behavior and Philosophy 36:71-86.
Sam Leigland (1998). Intentional Explanations and Radical Behaviorism: A Reply to Lacey. Behavior and Philosophy 26 (1/2):45 - 61.
Todd D. Janke (2008). Making Room for Bodily Intentionality. Polish Journal of Philosophy 2 (2):51-68.
Added to index2011-05-29
Total downloads5 ( #170,048 of 722,941 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,087 of 722,941 )
How can I increase my downloads?