Skinner’s critique of semantic reference and its implications

Last night we had a great discussion that followed our theme from the previous week: what does Skinner intend for we take as the definition of verbal behavior – does VB require a speaker’s behavior is mediated by another person or by a listener? What are the implications of each of these ways of interpreting Skinner’s system? We discussed the problems for a functional account of VB if the mediator of reinforcement must be a specially trained person and the problems for the precision of the definition if the mediator of reinforcement need only be a specially trained listener.

We then discussed Skinner’s critique of semantic reference and its implications. I discussed the way a kid at summer camp wrote [an ethnic slur for a Jewish person] word on my shirt. The controlling variables for his use of the italicized word were only marginally in the word’s origin; mostly, the controlling variables were in the current reinforcing audience of other campers who would snicker with him. Likewise, we discussed Spike Lee’s critique The Legend of Bagger Vance as an example of the Magical [an ethnic slur for a Black person]. Spike used the italicized word to call attention the way that current filmmakers make use of a racially insensitive trope portraying Black men as being kindly predisposed to serve white men just for the love of doing so, as though they have nothing else to do in life but assist white people humbly and without any expectation of compensation. Spike’s use of the word pulled upon semantic reference but was used under the controlling variable of the shock it would produce among readers in the 21st century. Skinner would say that these illustrations of verbal behavior exemplify VB under multiple control, a topic we’ll get to this coming week. Skinner critiqued the view that language use is determined solely by word origins for these reasons, but he had a much bigger purpose. He was interested in saving the world. Semanticists intended in Skinner’s day, as they do today, to constrain what we do by referring to the past. Consider the implications of the Dobbs draft leaked from SCOTUS this week, penned by members of the Court that refer to themselves as textual originalists. Consider the way that everyone talks about the importance of “freedom” – but whose freedom? What freedoms? Many decry being stripped of the freedom to pursue reproductive health but then push for limits on the freedom to own firearms. Others lament being stripped of the freedom to bear arms but labor to limit others’ freedom to pursue same-sex marriage. What does Skinner’s conceptualization of word meanings add to the national debate about freedom?

In addition we have been studying from the text

Skinner, B. F. (2014). Verbal behavior. Brattleboro, VT: Echo Point Books and Media.