Punishment and Personal Responsibility

295
creates, and in doing so he remains, as he was for the Greeks, divine.
We say that he is autonomous – and, so far as a science of behaviour is
concerned, that means miraculous.” (ibid. 14)
The more we come to learn about human action, Skinner contends, the
less reason there will be for assuming something like the autonomous
man: “Autonomous man serves only to explain the things we are not yet
able to explain in other ways. His existence depends upon our ignorance,
and he naturally loses status as we come to know more about behaviour.”
(ibid.)
Commitment to the “autonomous man” not only hinders scientific
progress, Skinner argues. It also stands in the way of more effective ways
of dealing with the problems of society. Inner man is employed to secure
the freedom and dignity of human beings, but in cementing notions such
as praise and blame, it is no longer a progressive force but an unwelcome
one. Whereas the doctrines of human freedom and dignity once served as
an impetus in the fight against the aversive control of tyrants, they today
serve to keep the mythical notions of autonomous choice and moral responsibility,
and its associated ill-conceived practices, alive (Skinner was
particularly sceptical of the practice of punishment, which he saw as inferior
to positive reinforcement). 320 There are better ways to organize
society, Skinner contends, and in Walden Two he sets out to describe a
utopian society based on a scientific conception of man.
Walden Two (1976) is a fictional story, the details of which need not
concern us. The main characters are professors Burris and Castle, who
visit the community of Walden Two, where Frazier, a former academic,
has created a small rural community based on the principles of behaviourism.
321 As the story unfolds Castle, a philosopher, remains sceptical
of Frazier’s creation, while Burris is gradually taken in by the small-scale
and self-sufficient community, with its apparently happy inhabitants,
four-hour workday and rewarding leisure time. As the story ends, Burris
320 See Skinner 1971, chapters 4 & 5.
321 About where Skinner’s sympathies with the characters lie: “Burris”, a psychologist,
is very close to “Burrhus” – Skinner’s first name. It is safe to say, however,
that Frazier represents Skinner’s ideas. Castle serves as the humanistmoralist
antagonist to Frazier in the novel, and is basically there to be proven
wrong by Frazier.