Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The behaviourist approach outlined
Outline the behaviourist approach
The behaviourist approach outlined
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Given the patient’s situation as mentioned in the introduction, I think it is more reasonable to assume she only has certain mental states, as supported by the fourth and third doctor’s different theories on the woman’s situation, and ultimately towards the mind-body problem, which I speculate are referring to the theories of behaviorism and physicalism, respectively.
I believe that the fourth doctor’s opinion supports my thesis because he claims: “Having mental states… It’s just behaving or being disposed to behave in ways that constitute having mental states.” (Topic intro.) I interpret D4’s statement to be inspired by the theory of behaviorism, with D4’s words being a very brief description of the theory itself; mental states are reducible
…show more content…
An alternate view would be Doctor Three’s views on the patient. I think that D3’s view is influenced by the theory of physicalism. Once again I shall refer to the crucial point in the scenario; the patient does not actually possess a ‘normal’ human brain. If that is the case, the patient cannot have human brain states, and would have some, but not all of her mental states. How strong of an argument this makes depends on the composition of the brain itself (which is not outlined directly, but can be inferred or subject to example.) Keep in mind, the definition of a ‘human brain’ is quite subjective as well; for the purposes of these cases, I consider a human brain to be something composed of human material (human neurons, axons, etc.) Case one: if the brain was only structurally different (ie: cube-shaped) but is still composed of human neurons, I think it can be inferred that the patient can still access her full range of mental states as her brain is still human. Case two: the other end of the spectrum where the patient’s brain is made from rubber; D3 would say that the patient in this case would not have mental states since the ball cannot be identified with brain states as it does not have the structural components a brain needs to work and ultimately, D3 would say that the patient does not mental states. This leaves the patient in two extremes; either she has mental states or she does not. It is at this point where D3 thinks that “her ‘brain’, though not a normal human one, can realize mental states.” This provides the two extreme cases with a middle point between the two extremes. D3’s point is the idea that brain states can be multiply realizable, meaning that brain states can still exist even if the
The Absent Qualia Argument’s counterexample suggests functionalism is susceptible to similar problems behaviorism faces. The additional requirement functionalism holds, namely functionally equivalent internal states, mental states possibly differ. Block argues it is plausible to not only have type identical behavior states, but also functionally equivalent mental states. However, functionally equivalent functional states cannot ensure equivalent mental states. So, functionalist theories of mental states are insufficient theories of the nature of mental
Castle closed the book deliberately and set it aside. He had purposefully waited half a decade to read Walden Two after its initial publication, because, years after parting from Frazier and his despotic utopia, he could not shake the perturbation the community inspired. But, eight years later, he had grown even more frustrated with himself at his apparent inability to look at the situation calmly. In a fit of willfulness, he had pulled the unopened volume from its top shelf, and now he was hoping that that had been a good idea. His daily temperament, to say the least, had suffered from his continual aggravation. Something had to be done about this.
Philosophy. He had inheritance from his father who favors Philosophy then he achieved a First
Fodor begins his article on the mind-body problem with a review of the current theories of dualism and materialism. According to dualism, the mind and body are two separate entities with the body being physical and the mind being nonphysical. If this is the case, though, then there can be no interaction between the two. The mind could not influence anything physical without violating the laws of physics. The materialist theory, on the other hand, states that the mind is not distinct from the physical. In fact, supporters of the materialist theory believe that behavior does not have mental causes. When the materialist theory is split into logical behaviorism and the central-state identity theory, the foundation of functionalism begins to form. Logical behaviorism states that every mental feeling has the same meaning as an if-then statement. For example, instead of saying "Dr. Lux is hungry," one would say "If there was a quart of macadamia brittle nut in the freezer, Dr. Lux would eat it." The central-state identity theory states that a certain mental state equals a certain neurophysiological state. The theory works in a way similar to Berkeley’s representation of objects. Both mental states and objects are a certain collection of perceptions that together identify the particular state or object.
...ies in the seeming dichotomy between mind and body. This dichotomy however remains a created one for the benefit of our own understanding. Yet, in the case of Conversion Disorder, delineated scientific thinking seems to have prevented our understanding rather than facilitating it; by inspecting the trees, we are missing the forest.
Epiphenomenalism is the idea that mental states are merely byproducts of physical states, and begs the question of how mental states could cause a physical state and have an effect on the physical world. According to this view, John Searle likens consciousness with the froth in ...
Behaviorism is a foundational theory in the world of psychology. However, behaviorism though it was a flourishing influential idea during the beginnings of psychology, it suffered a decline when other aspects of scientific research entered the psychology practice. Behaviorism was the scientific study of behavior. A plethora of great thinkers have made their marks with discoveries in behaviorism but B.F. Skinner was one of the most influential thinkers during the decline of behaviorism and the rise of experimental psychology.
Behaviorism is a branch of psychology that has a theoretical approach that gives emphasis to the study of behavior in place of the subject of the mind or the physiological correlates of one's behavior. Behavior is the externally visible response to a stimulus of an animal or human (Weidman). B.F. Skinner is one of the most prominent psychologists of the study of behaviorism. Skinner was on the advance of behaviorism. B.F. Skinner created a group of theories that set out to prove that subjective impetus is not what behavior in humans and animals is so much based on but that behavior is more based on possible reward received and chastisement applied to the animal or human (Newsmakers). Skinner entered into the branch of behaviorism in the 1920s. Behaviorism was still a fairly new branch to psychology at this time. However, Skinner's experiments in his libratory were broadly consideration to be electrifying and ground-breaking, illuminating an knowledge of human behavior and logistics (Newsmakers). Skinner called such behavior based on possible reward received and chastisement that was followed by the repetition of that behavior operant.
Are minds physical things, or are they nonmaterial? If your beliefs and desires are caused by physical events outside of yourself, how can it be true that you act the way you do of your own free will? Are people genuinely moved by the welfare of others, or is all behavior, in reality, selfish? (Sober 203). These are questions relevant to philosophy of the mind and discussed through a variety of arguments. Two of the most important arguments with this discussion are Cartesian dualism and logical behaviorism, both of which argue the philosophy of the mind in two completely different ways. Robert Lane, a professor at the University of West Georgia, define the two as follows: Cartesian dualism is the theory that the mind and body are two totally different things, capable of existing separately, and logical behaviorism is the theory that our talk about beliefs, desires, and pains is not talk about ghostly or physical inner episodes, but instead about actual and potential patterns of behavior. Understanding of the two arguments is essential to interpret the decision making process; although dualism and behaviorism are prominent arguments for the philosophy of the mind, both have their strengths and weaknesses.
As a Psychologist it may be expected that Mead’s conception of mind would place the person centre stage, however his interpretation of Behaviourist theory allows for the actions, and certainly the physiology of the individual to become a matter of external interpretation. Mead speaks of Qualia and experience (Mead, 1967: 5) in a way that seemingly looks purely at individual phenomenology. However whilst Mead initially seems to explore what the individual is directly acquainted with in the mental faculties the reasons may be wrapped up in a somewhat more objectively universalised study (Mead, 1969: 65) i.e. through behaviour. A single definitive answer to this question may initially seem to be difficult to defend as the question lends its self to a variety of interpretations. A further complication to this debate may come about as a result of the fact that “Mind, Self and Society” was produced posthumously. This work, as an assimilation of his students lecture notes, was assembled based on the ideas he conveyed during his lifetime. In order to achieve true accuracy and depth in our understanding it is important to cross reference this book with other works by Mead.
Logical behaviorism is the philosophical theory of behaviorism that states that being in a mental state is the same as being in a physical state. In other words, since all we can know about a person’s state of mind is through their behavior, there is nothing else. Logical behaviorists believe that any statement about the internal or private world of individuals may be translated into a statement about publicly observable actions. For example, if Michael has a toothache and he claims that he is in pain and is weeping. When the dentist checks Michael’s tooth he sees that it is decayed with an exposed pulp. This proves that he is indeed in pain. His physical state like his blood pressure and exposed nerves in his tooth explains his state. Emotions are not always expressed but they can be translated into some kind of physical condition. Hence, this theory deals with the explanation of mental concepts in terms of physical descriptions.
In the field of psychology many models have approached metal illness from different perspectives. Psychologists use models to depict or explain things that cannot be perceive. Psychologists use these models in order to explain, comprehend and treat mental illness. These models include the behavioral model, the psychodynamic model and the humanistic model. All of these models approach and explain mental illness from different perspectives.
According to the video entitled Behaviorism: A general overview of behaviorist learning theory, this approach to learning rejects the emphasis on the conscious and unconscious mind and focuses on the observable behavior of the subject. The principle of the behaviorism theory is that there is a direct association between a stimulus and the response an individual makes, the change in an individual’s behavior indicates that learning has occurred, and that individuals are not born with disposition to act in particular ways (Ormrod, 2012). In classrooms where the behavioral technique is used, there are often behavior modification and token reward systems in place (Campana, 2011).
According to the Dictionary of Psychology, Behaviorism is a theory of learning that is based upon the idea that all behaviors are obtained from their outside observations and not in one’s thoughts or feelings. In the 20th century, three important scientists John B. Watson, Ivan Pavlov and B.F. Skinner proved that Behaviorism is the study of observable behavior, as opposed to internal such as emotions and thinking. Although they all have their different forms of behaviorism, there ideas are similar. Behaviorism is the study of human behavior and is mainly based on the belief that all human behavior is learned through conditioning of the environment.
Fodor, a functionalist, argues that “there is no immaterial self that exists independently from the brain or the body ”. To him, “mental states are explainable in terms of