【思ったこと】
160518（水）トールネケ『関係フレーム理論(RFT)をまなぶ』(25)「考える」と臨床(2)
第３章の「PRIVATE EVENTS AND THEIR INTERACTION WITH OTHER BEHAVIOR（私的出来事と，ほかの行動との相互作用）｣の節では、Skinnerの主張内容において、いくつかの内包的な緊張関係（intrinsic tension）があると指摘されている。その１つは、
One example is his assertion that the analysis of private events often does not significantly impact our efforts to influence human behavior (Skinner,1953). But how are we then to understand his intention when writing in order to influence it (Skinner, 1974)? 【原書50頁】
ひとつの例は，私的出来事の分析は人間行動に影響を与えるための私たちの努力に対してそれほど効果を及ぼさない，というSkinnerの主張である。しかし，それならば，行動に影響を及ぼすために自分自身と自分の行動に気づくことの重要性についてSkinnerが記すときに，私たちは彼の意図をどのように理解すべきであろうか。【翻訳書72頁】
この部分で『科学と人間行動』(Skinner,1953)に言及されているので、念のため全文検索をしてみたが、具体的にSkinnerのどの記述のことを言っているのかは探し当てることができなかった。『科学と人間行動』の中で関連のありそうな記述は以下の通り。
- We may simplify the analysis by considering examples of self-control and thinking in which the
individual manipulates external variables, but we shall need to complete the picture by discussing the status of private events in a science of behavior (Chapter XVII).【229頁】
- In making a decision, as in self-control, the manipulated variables are often private events within the organism. 【242頁】
- This method of circumventing the privacy of the individual is not foolproof because the public
and private events may not be perfectly correlated.【259頁】
- A description of behavior which has not been executed appears to depend upon private events only. 【262頁】
- The private events correlated with the public events used by the community are also the result of discriminative behavior, not simple stimulation. 【265頁】
- Science does not always follow the principle of Occam's razor, because the simplest explanation is in the long run not always the most expedient. But our analysis of verbal behavior which describes private events is not wholly a matter of taste or preference. We cannot avoid the responsibility of showing how a private event can ever come to be described by the individual or, in the same sense, be known to him. Our survey of the ways in which a community may impart a subjective vocabulary did not reveal any means of setting up a discriminative response to privacy as such. 【280頁】
- The scientist's "observation" of a private event is a response to that event, or perhaps even a response to a response to it. In order to carry out the program of a functional analysis, he must have independent information about the event. This means he must respond to it in some other way. For a similar reason he cannot solve the problem of private events in the behavior of others by asking them to describe such events. It has often been proposed that an objective psychology may substitute the verbal report of a private event for the event itself. But a verbal report is a response of the organism; it is part of the behavior which a science must analyze. The analysis must include an independent treatment of the events of which the report is a function. The report itself is only half the story.【280頁】
- The line between public and private is not fixed. The boundary shifts with every discovery of a technique for making private events public. Behavior which is of such small magnitude that it is not ordinarily observed may be amplified.【282頁】
内包的な緊張関係としてもう１つ挙げられているのはSkinnerのルール支配行動に関する分析である。
Even though rule following does not originate in the private sphere, private events do seem to play a role in how this behavior evolves. This is particularly evident in behavior influenced by self-generated rules; that is, situations in which the speaker and the listener are one and the same.【原書50頁】
ルールに従うことは私的な領域に由来するものではないにもかかわらず，私的出来事は，この行動がどのように展開するかを決めるのに何らかの役割を果たすように見える。このことは, 自己生成ルールの影響を受ける行動については特に明白である。すなわち，話し手と聞き手とが同一の状況である。【翻訳書72頁】
この2番目の指摘は、臨床的な課題において特に重要な意味を持っている。
次回に続く。
|
05月のインデックスへ戻る