Bautista Fuentes Juan
Complutense University of Madrid.
Span J Psychol. 2003 Nov;6(2):121-32. doi: 10.1017/s1138741600005278.
The aim of this study is to bring to light and make clear the characteristic equivoque Pavlov made when he conceived the neurophysiological circuit involved in conditioned behavior as if this circuit contained or reduced, in its own terms, such behavior. I also wish to point out how this interpretation implies a distorted concept of the relationships between neurophysiology and behavior. As an alternative, it is proposed that behavior, which is always operant behavior, is not at all reducible to its neurophysiological ingredients, but instead acts like an arrow-head for adaptation that, in turn, confers a subordinate function to the neurophysiological ingredients involved. To make this evident, behavior is considered an operant organic activity that takes place in an environment of "remote co-present" texture, and different from its neurophysiological ingredients, which take place within the context of spatial contiguity relationships.
本研究的目的是揭示并阐明巴甫洛夫在构想参与条件行为的神经生理回路时所犯的特征性错误,就好像这个回路本身包含或简化了这种行为一样。我还想指出这种解释是如何暗示了神经生理学与行为之间关系的扭曲概念。作为一种替代观点,有人提出,行为始终是操作性行为,根本不能简化为其神经生理成分,相反,它就像一个适应的箭头,反过来赋予所涉及的神经生理成分从属功能。为了说明这一点,行为被视为一种操作性有机活动,它发生在具有“远距离共现”结构的环境中,与发生在空间邻近关系背景下的神经生理成分不同。