No Black Scorpion By 1419 in 1419's Diary Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 08:25:17 AM EST Tags: b.f.skinner, thankyougustad, verbal behavior, alfred north whitehead (all tags)
	a reply to thankyougustad's comment on B.F.Skinner involving a paraphrase and some quoting from the second of two epilogues from B.F.Skinnner's book "Verbal Behavior".

No Black Scorpion Is Falling Upon This Table -- Where I think I'm going (none / 0) (#19) by thankyougustad on Thu Oct 12, 2006 at 05:53:06 PM PDT I've always interpreted Whitehead's comment as an example of a behavoir that cannot be explained by behavoirism, and Skinner's interpretation as a good example of how clueless and Freudian he was. -- Verbal responses might differ quite widely in how much "clue" Skinner might have. However, Freudian is not one of his deficiencies. Radical Behaviorism has been, and continues to be, one of the strongest of the anti-Freudian doctrines in psychology. Specifically, in terms of his discussion with Whitehead, I offer a brief summary of the epilogue which is alluded to above. In the second of two personal epilogues that ends Skinner's 1958 Verbal Behavior he recounts a story where A. N. Whitehead makes a friendly challenge for him to explain his uttering "No Black Scorpion is Falling upon this table". This followed his earlier willingness to concede that Behaviorism could explain human behavior, except for speech. Whitehead felt that speech was a uniquely human domain. In his epilogue, Skinner makes many replies. The first is that it would be unfair to ask another science to account for almost any instance of something it had very little information about.  Skinner indicates that there was, in fact, no scorpion falling on the table, so it couldn't be the case that he was under the control of a scorpion when he said it (or, alternately, that Skinner was wearing a Scorpions t-shirt, for example). Thus, Skinner concludes, "But this is, of course, the kind of material the Freudians relish, for it is under just such circumstances that other variables get their chance." However, Skinner concludes that weak determining, but not "free" forces are at work here. "I suggest, then, that black scorpion was a metaphorical response to the topic under discussion. The black scorpion was behaviorism." Skinner did not say that there was a repressed wish, projection, a defective defense mechanism, a problem with fixation or some poorly inhibited id. In short, calling it a metaphor isn't Freudian, at least the way I read it. I don't think that Freudians have a lock on metaphor. In fact, I am unable to immediately think of any freudian mechanisms that rely primarily or exclusively on metaphor. Anyone? Skinner then fleshes out the next paragraph explaining how science has displaced the place of humanity as the center of the universe, as the unique creation of a loving god, and so on. Behaviorism, too, reduces the special place of human conduct, and like previous reactions to scientific accounts the bruised ego of humanity struggles along. Skinner then offers another possible interpretation that the black scorpion was a metaphor for progress. This is based on "those who knew" Professor Whitehead. Presumably Dr. Skinner was one such person. It was intended as a sort of consolation for the pessimism that might be had at science. Skinner then assures us that science must be applied to human affairs and that we should not stop out of fear. "I have found it necessary from time to time to attack traditional concepts which assign spontaneous control to the special inner self called the speaker. Only in this way could I make room for the alternative explanation of action which it is the business of the science of verbal behavior to construct. But whatever the reader may think of the success of this venture, I hope he will agree that the analysis has show respect for human achievement and that it is compatible with a sense of dignity - in short, that no black scorpion has fallen upon this table." B.F. Skinner, Verbal Behavior p.460 1958.

Poll

Skinner was using metaphor As a radical behaviorist would 25% as only a freudian would 0% as neither a behaviorist nor a freudian would 25% incorrectly. 50% Votes: 4 Results | Other Polls

Related Links

1419's Diary