What is (not) “complex” about behavior? Radical behaviorism, self, insight and language
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1590/0103-656420170027Keywords:
radical behaviorism, cognitivism, metatheories, complex behaviorAbstract
A criticism usually found in Psychology textbooks and manuals is that Behavior Analysis would not be able to explain complex psychological phenomena. These would be better approached by cognitivist explanations based on mechanisms internal to the organism. This study aims to discuss the relevance of this criticism in light of examples gathered from behavior-analytic literature. By analyzing researches about the formation of “self”, “insight” and language, we argue that “complexity” was imported to behavior-analytic laboratories as well as it flourished in numerous fields of research of radical behaviorism tradition. Additionally, five meanings of “complexity” extracted from the consulted literature are discussed. It is concluded that there is no useful meaning to this term and, for that reason, it can be abandoned as a criterion for classifying behaviors. As a consequence, “complex behavior” should be viewed only as “behavior” and nothing else.
Downloads
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Todo o conteúdo de Psicologia USP está licenciado sob uma Licença Creative Commons BY-NC, exceto onde identificado diferentemente.
A aprovação dos textos para publicação implica a cessão imediata e sem ônus dos direitos de publicação para a revista Psicologia USP, que terá a exclusividade de publicá-los primeiramente.
A revista incentiva autores a divulgarem os pdfs com a versão final de seus artigos em seus sites pessoais e institucionais, desde que estes sejam sem fins lucrativos e/ou comerciais, mencionando a publicação original em Psicologia USP.