Abstract

Three distinctive facets of classical behaviorism are critically examined. The first facet, methodological behaviorism, constitutes a straightforward commitment to empiricism and is, therefore, not controversial. However, the second facet, theoretical behaviorism, is found to be extreme and anachronistic. The final facet, so-called substantial behaviorism, involving, as it does, a change in the subject matter of psychology, is shown to be seriously in error and inconsistent with modern practices in the “hard” sciences.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call