| Sumario: | Staddon's I TNB i provides an alternative vision of what behavior analysis might have been had B. F. Skinner been a different scientist. Staddon's most salient scientific criticism of Skinner's work in I TNB i concerns Staddon's view of Skinner's epistemology. At its root, Staddon appears to have wished Skinner had proposed a different kind of theory of behaviorism, one that was decidedly different from Skinner's inductive version. Instead of considering that Skinner's strictures about theory may have been constructive in 1950 and that the field has developed since to the point where it is ready for theory, Staddon takes to bashing Skinner, lending the book a sadly negative tone.... Staddon's attack, like his portrayal of Skinner's view of theory, is often distorted and is much too harsh. Some of Staddon's concerns are legitimate, but it would have been appropriate for Staddon to acknowledge the considerable positive human contributions that have grown indirectly from Skinner's work, in addition to Skinner's hypothetical extensions.
|
|---|