I believe that when society embraces a science of action, it will be the opposite of that heavy-handed approach; promoted by artists, hackrs
-
-
Replying to @rplevy
It will be revolution of the weird and beautiful, not a cleansing of superstition and a casting off of historical struggle and inner spaces.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @rplevy
The behaviorists tried to use sound scientific laws of learning to create a cult, with radically undone enactive norms. Society rejected it.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Plinz
science as a practice is for that. Society is people's coordination and organization. Society is not a means to an end, it's our life
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Plinz
sure, but who claims "society" functions to determine what is true? Society is at best the sum of people deciding what to do...
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @rplevy
which is why I think its stance towards behaviorism is irrelevant as an argument re behaviorisms validity
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Plinz
it's not up for debate that behaviorism produced some of the only results worthy of being called scientific "laws" in psychology (/1)
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
(2/2) the behaviorist social proposition was to use these tools to change high-level cognitive behaviors, rejecting mentalist fiction
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
prescriptive science tends to be problematic, especially when the norms and the reasoning are not explicitly up for debate
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.