Austin Fontaine 
Megan Novelli I’m noticing a trend as the semester goes on, and it’s probably not just limited to Humanism and Behaviorism. Ever since the Empiricism (experience) versus Rationalism (reason) debate was brought up, it seems like it continues to show up in some form another throughout history. Even before Behaviorism was Mechanism, a precursor of sorts that assumed man was like a machine (something Behaviorism might agree with in how man is capable of “being programmed” through conditioning), both of which falling on the side of experience. When you breakdown the common Behaviorist’s position, it seems to suggest that man is kind of blank slate that is either operates or is operated on the environment. Nothing about this seems to imply there is anything to man prior to these “operations,” and seems to argue that whatever substance mankind has behind it is a result of consequences or the events that occurred through an individuals life, shaping them to behave the way in which they do.
The counter to this seems to be Humanism for the moment (though Pscyhoanalysis fits as well). The line that caught my attention the most was Abraham Maslow’s comment that “anyone who had a baby couldn’t be a behaviorist,” a comment that would stand in direct opposition to the Behaviorist/Empiricist position. It instead insists that people aren’t born with a blank slate just waiting to be filled with experience or be conditioned, that we are instead born with something already instilled within us. Psychoanalysis most certainly would be in line with this sort of thinking in its emphasis on the unconscious, a force that nigh constantly demands instant gratification (that doesn’t appear to be learned, but latent). Overall, the schools of thought, unlike Behaviorism, stress an emphasis on a sort of consciousness or reasoning to supersedes experience alone.
It would probably be less interesting if the theories were as ancient as the ideas they represent, but it provides only further evidence that the Experience/Rational debate is far from over, and continues to thrive even to this day. I can’t say if there will ever be an obvious answer to this question, but with all the technology and progress that has been made, I would expect to be closer to some sort of resolution. The fact that this argument continues to exists only makes me all the more skeptical.
Ian Robertson
3:16 pm, 11.18.10
The trouble with trying to move beyond the Experience/Rational debate, is that in western thinking it seems to be the only two points of view of learning that we have. Perhaps we are just stuck on the two points or it could be that these are the two natural courses of learning and that when it comes to learning there is no alternative point of view. I tend to take a pragmatic outlook and say that in the real world humans learn in a way that is both rational and empirical. However, I remain skeptical as well in the fact that like all points of view, rationalism and empiricism have their fundamentalists which won’t accept any kind of ultimatum or middle ground. And as long as we have extremists on either side, the debate will continue.
Josh Morrison
5:27 pm, 11.18.10
It is so frustrating how the answer to these debates seem to always be that the answer lies somewhere in the middle. It is so completely true in most scenarios but it has also started to feel like a copout. There are holes ready to be poked into both theories that prevent either of them from being completely accepted. I wish there was a more complete system of opinions with a more precise name for different dots along the continuum from one extreme to the other. Saying that the answer is in “the middle” just feels sloppy, like it refers to an undifferentiated yet giant mass of land that houses so many different people who are miles and miles away from each other yet still in “the middle.”
Morgan Myer
4:34 pm, 11.21.10
I like this post because I have been thinking a lot of the same thoughts lately. I think we are a lot more close minded in the west than we would like to believe. I wrote my paper about how our western therapies and ideas of the human psyche are actually having negative impacts on the rest of the world because we assume that what we believe is completely right and discount other peoples ideas. This could be a big part of why there is such a gap.