<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
On 2016-05-30 21:34, William Flynn Wallace wrote:<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAO+xQEao3COTSJT97aNUQcceSEX8OdWLg09zNks3d8FM+Ot1Ag@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr"><span
style="color:rgb(34,34,34);font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:12.8px">Now
why don't we all know this? Skinner not taught? ??? What
these early learning people did, from Pavlov on, has never
been found invalid or unreliable. So they are facts of life
underlying all learning, from a rat pressing a bar to the most
involved cognitive functioning (but see the history of insight
learning).</span><br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
People often throw out the behaviorist with the bathwater. While
classical and operant conditioning is a mainstay of psych 101
courses, most people who know about the topic tend to assume that
behaviorism is dead. Which is true, but the behaviorist findings
remain true even if the methodology and theory are pretty dead.<br>
<br>
I met a colleague writing a book on how to train your husband, and
it was all based on behaviorist theories. She remarked that she
couldn't name them as behaviorism (mostly because readers did not
want any fancy terminology), but it was straight out of psych 101.<br>
<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
Dr Anders Sandberg
Future of Humanity Institute
Oxford Martin School
Oxford University</pre>
</body>
</html>