Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-r5fsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T19:59:56.494Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Learning to Report One's Introspections

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 March 2022

Arthur E. Falk
Arthur E. Falk*
Affiliation:
Western Michigan University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The author argues for a purely naturalistic underpinning of the linguistic practice of reporting one's introspections. In doing so he avoids any commitments about the ontological status of entities referred to in introspective reports. He also presents evidence of the inadequacy of peripheralistic behaviorism as a naturalistic underpinning of introspective reports. The paper includes (a) a definition of ‘introspection’ and criticism of alternative definitions, (b) a classification scheme that sorts introspections into six different types, and (c) a presentation of evidence that the reporting of certain of these is based on such fundamental psychological phenomena as stimulus generalization, and possibly also conditioning to covert mediating responses.

Type
Research Article
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 42 , Issue 3 , September 1975 , pp. 223 - 241
Copyright
Copyright © 1975 by the Philosophy of Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

†

I am grateful to psychologists Richard Malott and Kay Malott for our discussions on stimulus generalization, and to John Dilworth and Michael Pritchard for our discussions on Wittgenstein. I wish to thank Gregory Sheridan and J. J. C. Smart for their comments on the paper. The project was supported by a fellowship from the Faculty Research Fund, Western Michigan University.

References

Brown, J. L. “Afterimages.” In Vision and Visual Perception. Edited by Graham, C. H. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1965. Pages 479–503.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. Aspects of the Theory of Syntax, Cambridge, Massachusetts: M.I.T. Press, 1965.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. Language and Mind. (1st ed.). New York: Harcourt, Brace & World, 1968.Google Scholar
Dennett, D. C. Content and Consciousness. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1969.Google Scholar
Doty, R. W. and Rutledge, L. T. “Generalization between Cortically and Peripherally Applied Stimuli Eliciting Conditioned Reflexes.” Journal of Neurophysiology 22 (1959): 428–435.10.1152/jn.1959.22.4.428CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Findlay, J. N. “Recommendations Regarding the Language of Introspections.” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 7 (1948): 212–236.10.2307/2103390CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gasking, D. “Avowals.” In Analytical Philosophy. (First series.) Edited by Butler, R. J. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1962. Pages 154–169.Google Scholar
Goodman, N. The Structure of Appearance. (2nd ed.). Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill Company, 1966.Google Scholar
Grice, G. R. “Investigations of Response-Mediated Generalization.” In Stimulus Generalization. Edited by Mostofsky, D. I. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1965. Pages 373–382.Google Scholar
Hebb, D. O. “The Mind's Eye.” Psychology Today 2 May, 1969. Pages 55–57, 67–68.Google Scholar
Herrington, R. N. and Schneidau, P. “The Effect of Imagery on the Waveshape of the Visual Evoked Response.” Experientia 24 (1968): 1136–1137.10.1007/BF02147808CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hirst, R. J. The Problems of Perception. London: George Allen and Unwin, 1959.Google Scholar
John, E. R. “Switchboard versus Statistical Theories of Learning and Memory.” Science 177 September, 1972. Pages 850–864.10.1126/science.177.4052.850CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCulloch, W. S. Embodiments of Mind. Cambridge, Massachusetts: M.I.T. Press, 1965.Google Scholar
Malcolm, N. Dreaming. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1959.Google Scholar
Millenson, J. R. Principles of Behavioral Analysis. New York: Macmillan Company, 1967.Google Scholar
Miller, G. A. Language and Communication. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1951.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, G. A. Psychology: The Science of Mental Life. New York: Harper and Row, 1962.Google Scholar
Morgan, C. T. Physiological Psychology. (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill, 1965.Google Scholar
Osgood, C. E. “The Nature and Measurement of Meaning.” Psychological Bulletin 49 (1962): 197–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Place, U. T. “Is Consciousness a Brain Process?” In The Philosophy of Mind. Edited by Chappell, V. C. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 1962. Pages 101–109.Google Scholar
Quine, W. V. O. Word and Object. Cambridge, Massachusetts: M.I.T. Press, 1960.Google Scholar
Smart, J. J. C. “Sensations and Brain Processes.” In The Philosophy of Mind. Edited by Chappell, V. C. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 1962. Pages 160–172.Google Scholar
Smart, J. J. C. “Reports of Immediate Experiences.” Synthese 22 (1971): 346–359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Staats, A. and Staats, C. Complex Human Behavior. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1963.Google Scholar
Wittgenstein, L. Philosophical Investigations. New York: The Macmillan Company, 1953.Google Scholar
Ziff, P. “A Response to ‘Stimulus Meaning’.” The Philosophical Review 79 (1970): 63–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar