Hocutt Max
University of Alabama.
Behav Anal. 2013 Fall;36(2):239-249. doi: 10.1007/BF03392310.
has long been conceived as divinely instituted, so otherworldly, rules meant not to describe or explain behavior but to guide it towards an absolute good. The philosophical formulation of this theory by Plato was later grafted onto Christian thought by Augustine and Aquinas. The equally ancient theory of the Greek sophist Protagoras (that the good is relative to personal preferences and morality to man-made social customs) was forgotten until revived in the 18th and 19th centuries by such empiricists as David Hume and J. S. Mill. Then it was dismissed again in the 20th century by G. E. Moore and W. D. Ross as that is, conflation of what is with what ought to be. However, those who took this dismissive attitude themselves made the reverse mistake of conflating what ideally ought to be with what actually is. In other words, they mistook ideals for actualities. As B. F. Skinner (1971) said in , sorting things out requires behaviorist parsing of the good (the personally reinforcing) and duty (the socially reinforced).
长期以来，它一直被认为是神所设立的，如此超凡脱俗，这些规则并非旨在描述或解释行为，而是引导行为走向绝对的善。柏拉图对这一理论的哲学阐述后来被奥古斯丁和阿奎那嫁接到基督教思想中。同样古老的希腊诡辩家普罗泰戈拉的理论（即善相对于个人偏好，道德相对于人为的社会习俗）被遗忘了，直到18世纪和19世纪被大卫·休谟和约翰·斯图尔特·密尔等经验主义者复兴。然后在20世纪，G. E. 摩尔和W. D. 罗斯又将其驳回，即把实然与应然混为一谈。然而，那些持这种驳回态度的人自己犯了相反的错误，把理想中的应然与实际的实然混为一谈。换句话说，他们把理想误认为现实。正如B. F. 斯金纳（1971年）在《》中所说，理清事情需要行为主义者对善（个人强化的）和义务（社会强化的）进行剖析。
