ABSTRACT
To say that the theoretical pattern of Pavlovian conditioning is an artificial abstraction which was not really exemplified even in Pavlov’s actual experimental situation would not be to say anything new. There can be no objection simply to the extension and stretching of a theoretical concept. It might indeed be argued that it is in such extensions of the application of theoretical concepts that the progress of science lies. But the fruitfulness of possible extensions of the application of a concept depends on what underlying analogies exist between the phenomena which the concept is invoked to explain. Skinner’s notion of an operant is meant to cover all forms of behavior on the part of an animal which are not reflexes simply elicited by a stimulus. There are great and substantial differences between cases, and for the most part they imply some recognition of or belief about what the situation is on the part of the animal or person concerned.
