Skinner is a extremist behaviourist and fatalist who proposed that human behaviour is controlled by nonsubjective discernible factors such as environmental conditions and familial factors. He suggested that human behaviour can be classified into two types: respondents and operants. Respondents are behaviours that caused by environmental stimulation while operants are behaviours that act on the environment. He asserted that both respondents and operants are wholly controlled by the environment. The chief difference of these two sorts of behaviours is the nature of the control. Respondent is elicited by an environmental stimulation while operant occurs before the environmental stimulation. The environmental effects which due to operants will command the behaviours that follows. There are three major ways that the environmental effects can command behaviours: support, penalty and extinction.
Skinner defined interior province such as feelings and emotions as a sensitivity to move which means impacting the chance of happening in certain behaviours. He claimed that interior province is the effects of familial makeup and personal experiences instead than the cause of behaviours.
Thinking and Decision Making
Skinner perceived believing as a sort of behaviour which is besides affected by our ain yesteryear experiences and through other ‘s instructions. A sort of thought that Skinner mentioned is “ determination devising ” which is closely related to doing picks. Skinner asserted that free picks do non be. Our past experiences, behaviours and behavioural effects control the determinations or picks that we make.
Harmonizing to Skinner ( 1971 ) , “ Freedom is a affair of eventualities of support, non of the feelings the eventualities generate ” ( p. 38 ) . He defined freedom as a behavioural procedure but nil related to the province of head. He believes that freedom can be partially experienced when we could avoid or get away from aversive elements of the environment. However, we still ca n’t liberate ourselves from the environment.
Although Skinner emphasized that behaviours are wholly controlled, our determined behaviours can modify the physical and societal environments which exert different effects on our behaviour, therefore commanding ourselves indirectly.
He believed that the behaviour which causes aversive effects can be controlled by negative support such as avoiding or get awaying from the state of affairs in order to cut down the chance of being punished.
The Position from Rogers
Rogers took the “ humanistic phenomenology ” attack ( Nye, p. 98 ) to understand human development.
Rogers believed that self-actualization, which includes personal growing and realisation of basic potencies, exists in homo. He suggested that we should non put any absolute bound to the degree of realization as our full potency is ever an unknown based on our present cognition.
Inner Human Experiencing
To analyze human behaviour, Roger emphasized the importance of interior human sing. This refers to measuring ourselves subjectively such as our ideas and feelings and seeking to understand others sympathetically.
The “ Self Theory ”
The subjective consciousness of ourselves and the surrounding environment are the most of import determiners of behaviours. The nonsubjective world of the environment is non an of import factor that determines behaviours. This means that the realistic self-concept develops a perceptual experience of the external world and the circumstance in which we find ourselves, therefore impacting behaviours.
Unconditional Positive Regard
Rogers suggested that positive respects are unconditioned demands of worlds, which include love, credence and regard. These demands are normally fulfilled by others who are in intimate relationships with us. Unconditional positive respects mean these demands can be fulfilled merely because we, as worlds, are worthy. When these demands are non given unconditionally, particularly in childhood, so there is a higher possibility for unfavourable features to be developed. On the contrary, conditioned positive respects refer to respects that are merely given when we meet others ‘ outlooks.
The cardinal differences in sing human development between Skinner and Rogers
Positions on Human Nature
In Roger ‘s attack, he assumed that we of course have an actualizing inclination and are “ growth-motivated individuals ” ( Nye, p. 135 ) . On the other manus, Skinner viewed worlds as “ environmentally controlled individuals ” ( Nye, p. 135 ) who are being predisposed and manipulated since birth to go merchandises of the environment.
Positions on Personality Development
Sing personality development, Skinner stressed that it depends chiefly on the results that our behaviours have. We all have different personalities which make us as alone individuals because there are differences in our support histories. The stronger the history of positive support is, the more likely for us to well-develop a favourable personality. Differently, Roger believed that worlds have the possible to keep an ever-upward spiraling in development if we are exposed to unconditioned positive respects.
Positions on Human Behavior
Although Rogers admitted that there is an influence of the environment on human behaviours, he stressed that the subjective, interior feelings and experiences play the most important function in finding behaviours. In contrast, Skinner insisted that our behaviours are simply controlled by familial and environmental factors but non any of our interior provinces. He believed that we are controlled by the environment in three major ways: support, extinction and penalty.
Positions on Freedom
When it comes to freedom, Rogers perceived it as something inner, subjective and experiential. Equally long as the openness and reactivity to the entirety of our sing are developed within us, we could see a sense of freedom and take the manner we behave. On the other manus, Skinner argued that freedom is nil related to the province of head. Worlds are non free to make up one’s mind our ain destinies but are determined by the environment.
My commentary on Rogers and Skinner Positions
I prefer Rogers over Skinner position on human development. I think that Skinner over-emphasized on behaviour control which is dehumanising and might indirectly misdirect the society to handle individuals as objects or machines which to be manipulated.
I tried to conceive of how my life would hold become if Rogers perspective did n’t of all time existed and my personal beliefs were all based on Skinners attack. All of my behaviours and experiences were predetermined and being controlled which I did non hold any picks at all. I could n’t see the sense of satisfaction from what I endeavored to accomplish since I would believe that favourable environment was the lone ground which contributed to my success. It would be detering and my life would hold less significance. On the other manus, Rogers perspective makes me experience optimistic towards life by believing that the potency for growing and realization reside within myself. Despite things are falling apart in times of hardship, I still live with hope and strongly believe that I am equipped with the power to get the better of troubles and live a better life in the hereafter.
Rogers perspective enhanced my self-understanding particularly through the construct of unconditioned positive respects. Harmonizing to my ain personal experiences, I strongly agree with Rogers that unconditioned positive respects are outstanding to the development of a healthy, to the full working individual. In my childhood, I had learnt that love and credence could merely be gained with the status that I was well behaved, independent and expressed with favourable feelings and emotions. As a consequence, I have been sing psychological uncomfortablenesss over the old ages with the feeling of being “ broken ” . I mean there is a big disagreement between my existent and ideal ego which Rogers called it as “ incongruence ” ( Nye, 2000, p. 110 ) .
Furthermore, I appreciated Rogers who had taken an inclusive attack to analyze human development which involves nonsubjective, subjective and empathetic positions. He paid great attending to the interior province of homo while at the same clip did n’t deny that the environment affects how we behave.
All, in all, I think both positions have its involvement to offer and doubtless allowed me to heighten self-understanding, the behaviours of others every bit good as the effects of the physical and societal environment. Although the apprehension of theories on human development is of import, I believe that we should maintain in head non to overlook each person ‘s alone personality and experiences nor over-generalize persons by enforcing these theories on them.