Human autonomy depends on reinforcement history. Many do not believe in free will. Skinner was both a philosopher and a scientist. Chomsky stays within the realm of philosophy and doesn't have the replicated science that Skinner does, work that established laws of behavior and is a natural science.

Thank you for the clarification. I would encourage people to explore both Chomsky and Skinner for themselves and not to write off Skinner's work based on popular misconceptions as so often happens. My first introductions to Chomsky had to do with his takes on language, which I found to be flawed.

And, I think these are great quotes of Skinner's. They're not saying the interior life doesn't exist. They're saying it is created through an individual's interactions with the environment. This is obvious.

In Science and Human Behavior, Skinner devotes an entire chapter to discussing "The World Within the Skin," which would indicate a recognition of same.

“Our increasing knowledge of the control exerted by the environment makes it possible to examine the effect of the world within the skin and the nature of self-knowledge.” p. 19, Science and Human Behavior.

“Our increasing knowledge of the control exerted by the environment makes it possible to examine the effect of the world within the skin and the nature of self-knowledge.” p. 19, Science and Human Behavior.

Fine.

I may well benefit from reading more Chomsky. Which is why I'll read Chomsky. I am biased toward Skinner's work as that is what I have studied most deeply. I have also studied Chomsky, but in a more limited way. The language acquisition device stuff is silly and was a total turnoff.

I didn't say that, and I wasn't debating. What you have posted here reflects limited understanding.

Just read Science and Human Behavior. Watch interviews with Skinner. Primary source it.

What is a "mind state"? Sounds made up. "Mind" (itself a vague concept) is our thoughts and pattern of thoughts, which are behaviors. Are they influenced by other internal processes? Likely. But that doesn't change that they are behaviors subject to all the same laws of behavior as other behaviors.

I don't want the quote. I wrestle with texts directly. Thanks.

Sigh. Quoting Skinner is like looking at humanity through a straw. You can do it, but there is so much more than pull quotes. All you mentioned here was Chomsky. So, that's what I responded to. I'm not going to read all your work.

As you may know, Skinner is very difficult to read. There are few simple quotes to pull from his work. You have to read it in its entirety and wrestle with it. And accept certain parameters in the discussion, such as that there is no "mind." There are thoughts, which are in themselves behaviors.

I am not assuming that. I do think you haven't read enough Skinner. Very few people have. And, if you simply take Chomsky's "side," you can't be objective. They notoriously disagreed. So, criticizing Skinner using Chomsky is kind of cheap. And, vice versa.

You have to go outside of Chomsky to properly evaluate Skinner.

Sure. But Chomsky isn't the best interpreter of Skinner, especially if we're debating Chomsky vs. Skinner. That Skinner sees that behavior is controlled by the environment doesn't mean that Skinner believes there is no interior environment of the learner. He does.

#blueandgreen

Here's hoping!