Comparing Watson's Behaviorism and Meyer's Objectivism: Reassessing Traditional Assumptions in Psychology

Abstract

This essay compares Watson's book "Behavior: An Introduction to Comparative Psychology" and Meyer's book "Foundations of Psychology" with a focus on three themes: the critiques of introspective methods, the use of terms such as instincts and reflexes, and the relation between mental life, physiology, and causal explanations in psychological science. Both Meyer and Watson recognized the need to overcome the limitations of introspective methods to develop a naturalistic framework for psychological science based on observation and testing. However, Meyer emphasized a physiological definition of instincts and habits as a means to achieve an objective psychology. Watson, on the other hand, advocated for a contextual or ecological definition of instincts and habits to understand how different species develop convergent functions, traits, drives, and behaviors. Meyer viewed the nervous system as the final frontier in psychological science, considering that mental life could be reduced to a function of the nervous system, which in turn triggers behavior through nervous connections. In contrast, Watson rejected neuro-reductionism and viewed behavior as a biological function that allows animals to adapt to new environmental contingencies throughout their lifetimes. Overall, this essay analyzes the differences between Meyer and Watson's perspectives on fundamental themes in psychology, including the role of observation and testing, the definition of instincts and habits, and the relationship between mental life, physiology, and causal explanations in psychological science.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 1 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.