The Behavior Analyst

, Volume 17, Issue 2, pp 371–372 | Cite as

Physicalism, Reductionism, and Verbal Behavior: A Reply to Leigland

  • Nathan Stemmer
In Response


  1. Killeen, P. R. (1984). Emergent behaviorism. Behaviorism, 12, 25–39.Google Scholar
  2. Leigland, S. (1993). In response: The case against physicalism in the analysis of behavior. The Behavior Analyst, 16, 351–355.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  3. Natsoulas, T. (1983). Perhaps the most difficult problem faced by behaviorism. Behaviorism, 11, 1–26.Google Scholar
  4. Quine, W. V. (1960). Word and object. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  5. Quine, W. V. (1974). The roots of reference. La Salle, IL: Open Court.Google Scholar
  6. Skinner, B. F. (1945). The operational analysis of psychological terms. Psychological Review, 52, 270–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Skinner, B. F. (1957). Verbal behavior. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Skinner, B. F. (1969). Contingencies of reinforcement: A theoretical analysis. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.Google Scholar
  9. Skinner, B. F. (1974). About behaviorism. New York: Knopf.Google Scholar
  10. Stemmer, N. (1983). The roots of knowledge. New York: St. Martin’s Press.Google Scholar
  11. Stemmer, N. (1992). Skinner and a solution to the problem of inner states. The Behavior Analyst, 15, 115–128.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Association for Behavior Analysis International 1994

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nathan Stemmer
    • 1
  1. 1.Bar-Ilan UniversityRamat GanIsrael

Personalised recommendations