|
| Chomsky's Attack on Skinner |
| Sunday, May 30, 2004 |
| 10:30 AM–11:50 AM |
| Hampton |
| Area: DEV/VBC; Domain: Applied Research |
| Chair: Gary D. Novak (California State University, Stanislaus) |
| Discussant: Gary D. Novak (California State University, Stanislaus) |
| Abstract: . |
| |
| Chomsky's Impeachment of the Behavioral Approach to Language |
| JOHN J. METCALFE, III (Florida International University), Sara Richardson (Florida International University) |
| Abstract: Skinner's verbal behavior introduced the concept of conditioning applied to language. It also seved to reintroduce the principles of behavior analysis in a new context. This approach was challenged by Chomsky (1959). Surprisingly, Skinner did not respond to this challenge. However, several years later Maccokedale (1969, 1970) answered Chomsky's challenge. This analysis will present the history and the issues of this intellectual exchange. |
| |
| The Chomsky/Skinner Debate: Is Grammar a Learned Process? |
| TARA M. SHEEHAN (Florida International University) |
| Abstract: Chomsky's review of Skinner's work Verbal Behavior presents an argument that is highly redundant, unsubstantiated and erroneously asserted as conclusive. The scientific rigor involved in the conceptualizationand the proper application of behavioral concepts such as reinforcement and stimulus are misunderstood by Chomsky. Chomsky fails to understand the concept of controlling stimuli because he is overly concerned with topography of behavior, ignoring function. Citing the ease and speed of language acquisition in children as evidence, Chomsky denies that language is learned and maintained through reinforcement. Chomsky attacks Skinner's application of the experimentally substantiated behavioral framework to verbal behavior, pointing to a lack of empirical testing as his evidence. Then Chomsky goes on to introduce his own theory, also not based on empirical work, and asserts its validity. Chomsky argues that humans possess a generative grammar and that the rudiments of that grammar are innate. The purpose of the current paper is to reassert verbal behavior as learned behavior and to examine grammar as behavior comprised of verbal operants, including the elusive autoclitic. |
| |
| Chomsky's Review of Verbal Behavior: Is Behaviorism Dead? |
| JENNIFER J. RUSSELL (Florida International University) |
| Abstract: Chomsky used his review of Skinner's Verbal Behavior as a medium to attack behaviorism itself as a heuristic.Chomsky has failed to disprove behaviorism, and his attempt to do so has, simply highlighted his lack of knowledge. Attempting to deconstruct and reduce to mentalism behavioral terms like stimulus, stimulus controland reinforcement, Chomsky only succeeds in depicting his misunderstanding of these terms. Throughout hisreview, Chomsky continually asserts that Skinner has no evidence to support the generalization the principles ofbehavior to verbal behavior. However, Chomsky's then offers his own conclusions that also lack empirical evidence. Clearly Chomsky has yet to prove anything. |
|
| |