3 ms·
> As the article suggests, Skinner was a very rational person In an audio recording he dismissed Chomsky’s critique of his work. He said that he hadn’t read i
by avgcorrection 5y ago
> As the article suggests, Skinner was a very rational person
In an audio recording he dismissed Chomsky’s critique of his work. He said that he hadn’t read it. He then went on to agree with people who had had read and disagreed with the critique... but how could he agree with them if he hadn’t read the critique.
- richardatlarge 5y agoNot sure. Skinner was at Harvard and Chomsky was at MIT. But Skinner was much more established in his respective field at that time, which is why Skinner made the mistake of ignoring the review. Skinner didn't believe Chomsky, or linguists generally, understood Verbal Behavior, which further encouraged him to ignore the review. At the end of the day, you can't have a real debate between two views unless both views are properly understood. Useful reference: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/223959896_Skinner_and_Chomsky_30_Years_Later_Or_The_Return_of_the_Repressed https://www.researchgate.net/publication/223959896_Skinner_a...
- avgcorrection 5y ago> Not sure. […] But Skinner was much more established in his respective field at that time, which is why Skinner made the mistake of ignoring the review. But that’s not the point. Say you haven’t read X: 1. It is rational to say “I haven’t read X so I can’t comment on it” 2. It is less rational (or dishonest) to say “I haven’t read X but I agree with these other people who have read it and dislike it!”