Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site pyuxd.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!harvard!bbnccv!bbncca!wanginst!decvax!bellcore!petrus!sabre!zeta!epsilon!gamma!pyuxww!pyuxd!rlr From: rlr@pyuxd.UUCP (Rich Rosen) Newsgroups: net.philosophy Subject: Re: Science & Philosophy vs Rosenism (Skinnerist Moral Philosophy) Message-ID: <1993@pyuxd.UUCP> Date: Wed, 30-Oct-85 00:17:04 EST Article-I.D.: pyuxd.1993 Posted: Wed Oct 30 00:17:04 1985 Date-Received: Sun, 3-Nov-85 10:16:22 EST References: <1663@pyuxd.UUCP> <1820@umcp-cs.UUCP> <1907@pyuxd.UUCP> <619@spar.UUCP> Organization: Whatever we're calling ourselves this week Lines: 31 >>Hmmm, this is an intriguing proposition. The internal state, having gotten >>to be the way it is (with indoctrination and conditioning leading that >>internal state into various forms).. > But does past history, in fact, determine `present state'? Of course. > If a great deal of recent scientific research and theory in biology, > chemistry, and physics is true, your pet behaviorist theories > must be tossed into the Humean flames! By Hume-an beings? > Why do you suppose Strict Behaviorism is obsolete? Because the bulk of psychology department intelligentsia find the notions repugnant, and have done their best to rid psychology curricula of the abominable notions! (Otherwise, wouldn't we have heard the grand debunking round the world?) > SMASH SKINNERISM!! Why not just reply to all my articles in the future with the following: Rosen is wrong because he believes in Skinnerism, which I don't like, in determinism, which I also don't like, etc. and thus he is completely and utterly wrong. Nahh! -- Life is complex. It has real and imaginary parts. Rich Rosen ihnp4!pyuxd!rlr