Comments on: Introduction to Psychology

By: behaviortank

behaviortank — Mon, 05 Oct 2009 00:54:36 +0000

There’s a lot on which we don’t agree, but I shall limit myself to one additional thought. You write: “Behaviorism reliance on experiments was its only scientific characteristic.” What’s you definition of science and how does behaviorism fall short? Experimental psychologists, whether or not they identify themselves as such, actually are methodological behaviorists that take the additional step of inferring mental states from their observations. Is this additional non-parsimonious step what makes cognitive psychology more scientific in your opinion? This is the reason many persons, whether readers agree or not, call cognitive psychology pseudoscience (or short of natural science). It’s important to note that radical behaviorists also find “thoughts” a worthwhile subject for inquiry, but treat “thoughts” as behavior, rejecting Cartesian mind-body dualism, or that consciousness somehow operates beyond physical observation (which isn’t limited to sight), which allows them to accurately claim to be practicing natural science.

By: youngminii

youngminii — Sun, 04 Oct 2009 11:51:29 +0000

Cognitivism existed long before behaviorism. It’s just that cognitivism gained popularity with the rise of everyday computing technology.
Of course psychologists venture across the different areas of psychology. I never said that they were confined to one. In a psychology career, almost all psychologists go through at least two of the areas of study.
And yes, you are right about the Sigmund Freud section. I do not believe nor encourage the belief that Freud was literally the greatest psychologist ever. I should have made it clearer that I thought Freud was the most influential.

By: behaviortank

behaviortank — Sun, 04 Oct 2009 00:47:09 +0000

How does ‘behavior analysis’ incorporate cognitivism? More accurately, it’s said that the influence of behaviorism on cognitivism, given that it sprung up in reaction to behaviorism, is pervasive, as methodological behaviorism pervades psychology today (even if radical behaviorism has been relatively marginalized). Also, behavior analysis isn’t a form of behaviorism; behaviorism is the philosophy underlying the natural science of behavior, and behavior analysis is this natural science of behavior. Typically, psychology is broken into 3 areas: theoretical, experimental, and applied. But this is a distinction based on formal characteristics that practically does not hold, just as you don’t find an applied physicist who doesn’t venture into the theoretical or a theoretical who operates wholly beyond the applied. On one final note, by your claim that Sigmund Freud was “possibly the greatest psychologist to have ever lived,” which is a far cry from consensus among psychologists, do you mean that he was one of the most influential? Otherwise, on what grounds do you make this assertion?

By: Introduction to Psychology | Psychology in Life

Introduction to Psychology | Psychology in Life — Fri, 02 Oct 2009 09:34:59 +0000

[...] More here: Introduction to Psychology | Psychology in Life [...]