The Limitations of the Behaviourist Approach - Chomsky's Critique of Skinner - Literature review Example

The limitations of the behaviourist approach to the study of learning, with reference to Chomsky’s critique of skinner al affiliationTutor Date The limitations of the behaviourist approach to the study of learning, with reference to Chomsky’s critique of skinner 1.0. Introduction In the study of psychology, the works by Noam Chomsky have been very valuable to the study of language learning. Nevertheless, Chomsky is remembered for his unvarying critics on the compilations by B.F. Skinner. Moreover, the reassessments by Chomsky can arguably be indicated to have massive impacts on the research trends that have been ongoing in psychology and outlooks that have been imposed on the behaviourism features among the students of psychology. Chomsky’s works have been rated as the most influential pieces in the study of psychology particularly concerning behaviourism. In this case, a lot of transformations were witnessed amongst learners who studied the language. With his works labelled as classics, and having all the evidence in regard to the study of language, as opposed to behaviourism that is too general, this work shall aim to understand the limitations of the behaviourist approach, with the reference to Skinner. 2.0. Body In the views of Noam Chomsky, the aspect of behaviour cannot be understood in the study of B.F. Skinner’s operant conditioning. According to the thoughts of Routledge & Chapman (2005) Chomsky indicates that Skinner’s work is the worst ever written in the history of psychology. In this case, Chomsky indicates that his work comprises tangible evidence and conclusions as compared to the behaviourism standpoint. First, Chomsky argues against the viewpoint of Skinner’s learning through operant conditioning by arguing that one cannot study the behaviour of an individual, but not the components under study. The psychologists in this case, must not rely on the existing evidence and the abilities portrayed by the individuals, but the psychologists must go a step ahead and analyze the contents of the brain of the persons under study. From the brain, the researchers are likely to understand how the behaviours portrayed by the individuals have come into practicality. The brain, according to Chomsky (2006), is the root of the behaviours portrayed by the individual. The behaviours are simply a replica of the processes that go on in the individuals’ brain and cannot be alienated from the end product that is the behaviours of the individuals (Chomsky, 2006). In relation to Chomsky, Skinner went for end product- the behaviours portrayed- without getting to the grounds in which the behaviour has its roots. According to Altmann & Gaskell (2007), Chomsky emphasises that study of the brain gives evidence of the behaviours portrayed by the individuals. In his work, Chomsky compares the study of behaviour to referring to Physics as readings in Science without considering the fact that the readings are mere data collected after an occurrence of a certain experiment by the learners or scientists in the laboratory (Randall, 2007). The study, analysis, testing and comparisons of data in the study of any field are compulsory. The end product cannot be alienated from its components; thus, the study of behaviour by Chomsky holds much evidence as compared to Skinner’s study on operant conditioning and learning. On another view point, Chomsky indicates that yet another limitation of Skinner’s behaviourist approach is that he relied so much on speculations as compared to critical study of the conditional behaviour. Scheer (2010) indicates that Skinner applied experimental investigations that had unfounded experimental techniques that would have led to his study to having valid evidence on human behaviour. The limited significance of the techniques led to the coming up with the premise that behaviour cannot rely on inferences, but critical analysis of facts. According to Shackelford & Vonk (2012), Chomsky holds the view that language can only be understood in relation to Information Processing Theory. This theory works on the grounds that all kinds of information have to be retained, the individual must have some information that acts as a form of backup. Through the previously stored information in the brain, the individuals are able to relate new information to that has earlier been learnt by the individuals. Chomsky believes that data can only be retained if the learners continually associate the new information to the previously taught. This leads to the aspects that the brain is the store of information, which according to the works of Skinner, did not hold much importance. In Noam’s opinion, learning takes place through relating information that was previously acquired by the individuals; thus, creation of a network of information leads to completeness of the entire system of learning (Chomsky, 2006). This view in entirety does not match with the thoughts of Skinner, who does not undergo the process of understanding the building blocks of knowledge that exist in the brain of individuals. It is evident that Skinner alienates the brain from the learning process. Chomsky gives an example of generative grammar that is correlated to the previous basics on the Information Processing theory of learning (Shackelford & Vonk, 2012). The works complied by Skinner were completely detached from the aspect of mental structures and learning. Chomsky revived the aspect of cognitive ability and learning by bringing back the facet of experimental psychology in the study of mental ability and learning. The mind can certainly not be withdrawn from the study of any category of psychology. The views by Chomsky (2006) led to an augment in the number of people who would accept as true the fact that the behaviourism has its essentials on the psychological structures and not a study of the behaviours revealed by the individuals. The cognitive upheaval of psychology, in relation to Miller (2003) was being accepted by a wide array of persons. The characteristics of mind and the perceptions of individuals became imperative facets of the study of psychology. In relation to language and attainment of language, Virués-Ortega (2006) indicates that the aspect of language is intrinsic in nature. On a decisive point of view, Chomsky supposed in the fact that an individual’s ability to study and comprehend language comes from their innate attributes that is the language acquisition device (LAD). He emphasizes that the LAD originates from the brain. Persuasively, Chomsky indicates that language cannot be learnt, but must come from inside the person. In the case of Skinner, he would study ‘what comes from the individual’ through operant conditioning, unlike Chomsky who would shed light on the building blocks that generate the behaviours displayed by the learners. Skinner has been seen to use a black box to explain the study of language, which he indicates to be the bridge to understanding the concepts of language. This black box did not include the language acquisition device (LAD), an elucidation of the verity that the origin of language was ignored. The account of language development and learning cannot be understood if a proper account of language learning is not studied. Skinner did not appreciate the fact that learning of language must have a foundation and that learning cannot take place not only through observation, but evidence must be intertwined in the observations made by the learners. To support his views against those portrayed by Skinner in terms of learning and acquisition of concepts, Chomsky (2006) argued that language learning must take the functionalist approach, which focuses on the developments of the learners’ ability to communicate in every step of learning. The functions that have been portrayed at every stage of learning comes from within the individual, and that each stage has a role to play as well as prove that the brain of the learner has been influenced in various ways to grasp the concepts. The core aspect in this case, refers to the functionalism of the brain in learning language, not the learner behaviours. While Skinner would be of the thought that language can be acquired by the learners by imposition of some behavioural components, Chomsky would hold the view that language is learnt through organization of the learners in a language learning environment. The instructors must be persons that understand language structures and understand the methodologies that would allow for successful completion of tasks by the learners in the classroom setting. This cannot be successful by merely studying the behavioural attributes of learners and leaving them to acquire language concepts. 3.0. Conclusion Conclusively, it is justified to argue that Chomsky is an intransigent critic of the works by Skinner from the view that his works lack the basics that underlie the concept of learning. Learning must be inborn; thus, the mental structures are the basics of learning. Mental processes, in Chomsky’s view have to be put into perspective in an attempt to understand any form of learning, a major point of critic to the compilations by B.F. Skinner. All behaviours in Chomsky’s view are resultant from the mental processes. In this case, language cannot be understood through operant conditioning or stimulus and response reinforcements. Chomsky strongly believes that behaviourists’ belief that language is a mere form of activity is completely wrong. References Altmann, G., & Gaskell, M., 2007. The Oxford Handbook of Psycholinguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Chomsky, N., 2006. Language and mind. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Miller, G., 2003.The cognitive revolution: a historical perspective. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, Vol.7 No.3. Available at: http://www.cs.princeton.edu/~rit/geo/Miller.pdf Randall, M., 2007. Memory, Psychology and Second Language Learning. London: John Benjamins Publishing Company. Routledge, C., & Chapman, S., 2005. Key Thinkers In Linguistics And The Philosophy Of Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Scheer, T., 2010. A Guide to Morphosyntax-Phonology Interface Theories: How Extra-Phonological Information Is Treated in Phonology Since Trubetzkoys Grenzsignale. London: Walter de Gruyter. Shackelford, T., & Vonk, J., 2012. The Oxford Handbook of Comparative Evolutionary Psychology. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Virués-Ortega, J., 2006. The Case Against B. F. Skinner 45 years Later: An Encounter with N. Chomsky. Behav Anal. 2006 Fall; 29(2): 243–251. Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2223151/ Read More