LB 023-025T 勝芬
Chapter 1- V. Relationship between Form and Behavior
When the term learning theory is used, it is ordinarily applied to universal aspects of learning. Psychologists who concern themselves with such theories point out sometimes that there are some aspects of behavior to which the theories do not apply, as, for instance, the swallowing mechanisms in pigeons, the peculiarities of a buzzard’s flight, or the phonetic differences between meowing and barking. These phenomena are considered to be appropriate subjects for the biologist but not for the behaviorist. The distinction between biological and psychological aspects of behavior may be possible in certain instances, particularly in behavioral phenomena observed in laboratory experiments, but in many more instances there is no way of telling whether a given phenomenon ought to be explained (or investigated) in terms of psychological or biological mechanisms. We have criticized this distinction throughout this chapter, but we must add one more reason for abolishing the distinction.
當我們提及「學習理論」(Learning theory) ，通常講得是universal aspects of learning學習的世界觀。心理學家涉及這些理論時，Psychologists who concern themselves with such theories有時候會指出這些理論不適用於there are some aspects of behavior一些動物行為當中，例如：鴿子吞嚥的機制；鵟鷹 鷲buzzard鳥飛行的獨特性；或是貓叫和狗吠聲韻phonetic上的不同。這些現象恰如其分的被視為生物學家研究的appropriate subjects for the biologist but not for the behaviorist課題，而非行為學家。動物行為在生理層面和心理層面的差別，或許在某些情況中能有所區別The distinction … may be possible in certain instances, particularly in behavioral phenomena observed in laboratory experiments，但在many more instances大部分的狀況裡，我們無法單there is no way of telling whether a given phenomenon ought to be用生理結構或心理mechanisms結構來解釋(或研究)某種現象。我們已經在整個章節中批評此種區別，但我們仍必須再加上一項屏除此種區別的理由。
It is often thought that behavior which is executed by or is dependent upon a peculiar structure typical of a certain type of animal must therefore be biologically based. The grasping movements of an elephant are of no particular relevance to learning theory; they are said to be species-specific and biological! A corollary to this kind of reasoning is that the absence of a special structure or organ should be a criterion for the psychological nature of the behavior. Thus it has been pointed out time and again that man has evolved no special organ for speech, the implication being that we are simply making use of the organs for eating and breathing in our efforts to communicate. This is seriously offered as evidence for the arbitrary, learned, artifactual nature of language.
我們通常會認為It is often thought that behavior which某種特定的行為，是依賴某種特定生物的獨特構造所操控，must therefore be biologically based因此和生物學脫不了干係。大象抓握的動作和學習理論沒有特別的關係，他們說這就是species-specific and biological物種特性和生物本能。這種推論的必然結果，就是absence of a special structure or organ特殊構造或器官應該當作a criterion for the psychological nature of the behavior行為的自然心理標準。因此，人類物種it has been屢次被指出，並沒有發展出特殊的器官來說話，the implication being that we are simply making use of the organs for eating and breathing in our efforts to communicate這些器官只簡單被用來進食和呼吸進而努力嘗試來溝通。這種說法seriously offered as evidence for的證明了語言的任意性、可學性和人造性。
The reasoning here is poor, however. The relationship between the outer form of an animal to its species-specific behavior repertoire is not always clear. So many factors influence this relationship that no canonical truths about innateness may be inferred from it.
然而此理論的reasoning立場相當薄弱，The relationship between動物的外在形體和特定物種的behavior repertoire行為表現，並沒有相對的關係is not always clear，許多因素都影響著這層關係，沒有任何標準的真相no canonical truths about innateness可從中推論而得。