This article is from 2018 and is on the front page of hacker news.
Although "mental models" are a myth, I was reminded of one of my favorite quotes:
“Contingencies contain reasons which rules can never specify.” –B.F. Skinner
commoncog.com/blog/the-menta
Conversation
Replying to
That's a good quote. Thank you.
(I should note that 'mental models', in a Piaget sense, aren't a myth. I object merely to the faddish use of the term.)
1
1
Replying to
Personally, I'm a bit of an odd duck, and reject mentalistic explanations entirely. Because of it I have been called a Skinnerian, but I'd say that's far more dismissive than decisive or detrimental. Developmentalism, like the other horticultural metaphors, is out for me too.
1
1
1
You could say I object to the faddish use of the term "mind" or "mental", but it's a fad that's much older than most modern cultures.
1
Replying to
If it works for you, and it allows you to achieve your goals, why ever not?
Replying to
It is not only easier to inspect the selective role of the environment rather than to introspect the mind, but it's also more effective as an aid changing behavior without having to "change minds".
1
1
One reason not to is if I'm wrong. That is, if it is inaccurate or ineffective for me to reject mentalistic explanations, then I shall go back to them as fast as I can.
1
1
Show replies