User talk:Briandnorton

hey Brian me and you are in the same program and we made our pages for the same reason....

Tvweathers (talk) 17:29, 1 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is what I submitted on the Behaviorism article talk section.

Would it be appropriate to add this to the philosophy section of the Behaviorism article? Behaviorism as described here is, in a broad sense, all of the following things. Firstly “Psychology is the science of behavior. Psychology is not the science of mind.”(George) Secondly “Behavior can be described and explained without making ultimate reference to mental events or to internal psychological processes. The sources of behavior are external (in the environment), not internal (in the mind, in the head).(George) Lastly “In the course of theory development in psychology, if, somehow, mental terms or concepts are deployed in describing or explaining behavior, then either (a) these terms or concepts should be eliminated and replaced by behavioral terms or (b) they can and should be translated or paraphrased into behavioral concepts.”(George) In order to more fully understand the previous examples the following sentences will further break their concepts down into a more simplistic material. The first statement is alluding to the idea that Psychology is not about the study of the mind but it is rather a study of behavior. The second statement is in reference to the theory that when behavior is being addressed in reference to human beings, it can be described and understood without definitively alluding to specific mental/psychological processes. The last statement summarizes, what appears to be a note of good practice, the simplification of psychological terminology when referencing a humanistic behavior into something which merits behavioral Here is the source. George, Graham. "Behaviorism." Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Stanford, 2010. Web. 17 Apr 2012. <http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/behaviorism/>. Briandnorton (talk) 20:08, 1 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]