March 9, 2016

March 9, 2016

Written by Maximus Peperkamp, M.S. Verbal Engineer

Dear Reader,

If we put things more plainly, the paper “Humble Behaviorism” by A. Neuringer (1991) would never have been written nor published, if it wasn’t for the fact that behaviorists, at least some of them, recognize that they are unscientific. “An explicitly humble behaviorism could reduce the threat of behavioral research perceived by many in our society; meliorate fights among sub-disciplines of psychology, so that adversaries might work toward common goals, and encourage researchers to identify and admit their own arrogance and error, thereby motivating research.” As this second sentence demonstrates, something should be said about how behaviorists talk with each other as well as with non-behaviorists. In spite of all his so-called “explicit humble behaviorism”, Neuringer probably because he doesn’t know much about it, only indirectly refers to the how behaviorists communicate. 

Neuringer circumvents the important issue of ineffective communication by placating and reassuring his colleague behavioral scientists that they are no less arrogant than any other scientists. He distances himself further from what should be considered the elephant in the operant chamber, by stating that neither “behavioral science, or science generally” is “unusually arrogant.” Presumably, his paper is a function, not of his frustration, but of his magmanimity. We are supposed to believe that he is not upset about anything and that he is perfectly okay with the fact that “arrogance and humility in science coexist.” All of this is done to present his hypothesis that “humility will prove to be functional.” What a complete nonsense!