THE SHADOW OF METAPHYSICS

What, if any, are the roles of traditional metaphysical concerns in a natural science of behavior? There are questions and issues that seem to frame the positions of many who call themselves "behaviorists," such as mind-behavior or mind-brain relations, realism vs. pragmatism, contextualis...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Behavior and philosophy 2020-01, Vol.48, p.82-90
Main Author: Marr, M Jackson
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Behavioral psychology
Metaphysics
Nature
Philosophers
Philosophy
Pragmatism
Realism
Science
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:What, if any, are the roles of traditional metaphysical concerns in a natural science of behavior? There are questions and issues that seem to frame the positions of many who call themselves "behaviorists," such as mind-behavior or mind-brain relations, realism vs. pragmatism, contextualism vs. mechanism, description vs. explanation, and the meaning of "behavior" itself, all and more of which might be assigned to metaphysical arguments. Positions such as these reflect the many different varieties of behaviorisms, but, in general, seem to have relatively little influence on, or relevance to, how sciences of behavior are actually conducted-that is, by naturalist-empiricist approaches, as with other sciences worthy of the name. Of course, practices in the natural sciences are not without metaphysical stances, but the standpoints mentioned above largely reflect irresolvable or confused verbal entanglements that, at best, might be addressed by an analysis of verbal behavior (e.g., how and why do we come to talk in these ways?). Aside from such an analysis, the positions themselves, while fun to engage, have little or no empirical or even theoretical content and thus seem divorced from a "thoroughgoing" science of behavior.
ISSN:1943-3328