Talk:Walden Two

w2 or behaviorism ?

These statements:

"Walden Two is controversial because it includes a rejection of free will [3] and a rejection of the proposition that human behavior is controlled by a non-corporeal entity, such as a spirit or a soul [4]."

Are really more appropriate to the general 'controversy' around Radical Behaviorism, the philosophy of Behaviorism, and not to Walden Two specifically. Environmental (and genetic) determinism is no longer all that controversial and is implicit in multiple treatment disciplines even if they aren't described as such: for example, biotechnology.

Skinner's rejection of the soul isn't very controversial in modern America, since the 1940s until now, the US has become less religious. Athiesm may not be widely accepted but it's hardly "controversial". MRAY (WMF) (talk) 19:22, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

criticism

I deleted this passage:

"There seems to be this false sense of equality in the workforce. Women are primarily placed into stereotypical females roles like cooking, weaving, and being a caregiver. Males were primarily placed into stereotypical male positions like being a doctor, farmer or the operation of heavy equipment."

It appearts to be "original research" and has no source citation. Further, taken at face value it attempts to judge a novel written in the 1940s in which there is an explicit ideology of female emancipation and preferring, instead, to argue that there is a subtle form of sexism in the novel. For the time it in which it was written it is, I believe, a fairly progressive position. By contemporary, post-1970s feminist standards, it is not. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.37.226.207 (talk) 03:38, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

This "book review" is a bit biased. Not that I like cults or anything, but you could at the very least make it less obvious that you don't like Skinner. I also don't like the description of why they have children and marry at such a young age, and this article fail to mention many of their other ideas about family that would be helpful to explain why their society can manage.

96.235.237.233 (talk) 20:19, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm also concerned this reads a little like a book review, without many references. That's a bit of a vague criticism though... so to start with something concrete, I've just tagged some sentences presented as facts that lack references and also tagged some weasel-worded sentences that are difficult to substantiate and might be seen as speculation or original research. --Ds13 (talk) 21:59, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

I think this article is terrible. After reading Walden Two and then reading the introduction to this article, I feel like it emphasizes the controversial topics to paint it in a bad light, while missing the point.

The point of the book is not to show what a society should do (Skinner is a scientist and an artist). Rather that we can use a science of behavior to better understand what a society should do and that Walden Two would be a "a good start". Walden Two was to catalyze the behaviorist movement's integration into social and political theory. He made it too captivating and it lost the readers in controversy!

76.173.101.135 (talk) 06:53, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Deletion of Inappropriate Link to "utopian novel".

The internal link to utopian novel is to a page that does not list Walden Two as a utopia. That page lists Walden Two as an intentional community, a community of "people who strive for a more ideal life." Skinner conceived Walden Two as an imperfect society in which people use behavioral science to find, by experimentation, solutions to their problems. Walden Two is best described as an experimental community. See Skinner, B. F., "The Design of Experimental Communities", in the International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences (Volume 16). New York: Macmillan, 1968, pages 271-275.

I am going to remove the link to utopian novel because that reference is incorrect and because Walden Two is not a utopia--it's an experimental community that has its fair share of problems. Greg987 (talk) 02:13, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

I removed the "utopian novel" reference in the text of the article and then I did put "utopian novel" into the genre section of the infobox. And "utopian novel" is still in the "Categories" box at the very bottom of the article page. Greg987 (talk) 01:07, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Rozycki's Alleged Criticism of the Role of Women in Walden Two

Rozycki's "Critical Review" of Walden Two does not, as alleged, criticize "the conventional role of women in Walden Two which could be seen as sexist". I therefore deleted the reference to Rozycki's alleged criticism.

Read his essay for yourself and see if you can find that kind of criticism: http://www.newfoundations.com/EGR/Walden.html

Greg987 (talk) 05:59, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Walden Two is "Science Fiction"

"Walden Two Revisited" is the title of the 12-page preface to the 1976 edition of Walden Two. In the second page of that preface, Skinner wrote, "The 'behavioral engineering' I had so frequently mentioned in the book was, at the time, little more than science fiction."

I have added "Science fiction" to the genre section of the infobox and I also added "Science fiction novels" to the category box at the bottom of the article. I am also going to add "science fiction" to the first sentence of the article, in front of the word "novel". Greg987 (talk) 19:00, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

I think it is really stretching it to call W2 "science fiction", based only on that quote and not the content of the book. I am strongly tempted to remove it from the first sentence. It's a utopian novel. Huw Powell (talk) 00:40, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

I would have to agree with Greg987, not only in the context of Skinner's own comment, but in the scope of things like Kurt Vonnegut novels which are "science fiction" - speculations on how science could play out, even if they aren't comprised of rocket ships, space engines, and laser beam battles. Skinner's role was as a scientist - I think that is without a doubt? - and his novel here was to extend his own science in a fictional form. In context Skinner's quote would extend the analysis that "behavioral engineering" was little more than science fiction, however as of 2012 the science fiction is now "science fact". Organizational Behavior Management (OBM) is a discipline that is largely concerned with the issues of a Walden Two like structure (and similarly with ABA/EAB applied and research disciplines of Skinner's science). That said, I think Skinner's motivation was largely "utopian fiction" and he mentions many utopian novels in Walden Two. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.90.214.138 (talk) 04:11, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Thoreau's community of philosophers?

I have searched for a reference for the "'community of philosophers' posited by H. D. Thoreau". See "The community" section of the article. I have not been able to find in Thoreau's writings any mention of a "community of philosophers". I will delete that quotation unless someone can provide a reference for it. SamanthaJF (talk) 00:48, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

You use the word personocracy. personocrat = personocentricity, -ality, -ism

make DIFFERENT pages

• personocracy (politics)
• personocracy (religion)
• personocracy (philosophy)

Not to be confused with hominocracy. God is a person (intellectual criteria, sometimes including empathy) but not a human (biological criterion).

We should say personotardy in a disparaging manner.

The minister of Greece during its economic bankruptcy was a personotard.

https://www.yanisvaroufakis.eu › so... Web results Soros tries to snatch hope from the jaws of despair – Yanis Varoufakis Oct 17, 2011 · Los Angeles Review of Books: On Yanis Varoufakis's new theory of the global financial crisis, by ...... I read enough about personocracy for now.

Yanis Varoufakis led Greece into bankruptcy. During his time. His view on game theory is when you lose, blame others. Now he's in an extremely weak party that will never govern and he doesn't want to support bigger parties, neither do they need them or like him. He is well married and many layminded people like Alexis Tsipras are easily impressed by Yanis' schizotypoidal turditure. Yanis Varoufakis is successful according to game theory in the personal level (except for the early ages of his daughter that he missed most of it); but he's a bad teacher. Here Skinner avoids to expose real world situations. Being a knower doesn't necessarily make one a good teacher!!!

"Criticisms" section

This looks like a fairly poorly-written section to me, overall. There's lots of unsourced statements ("There are several varieties of behaviorism, but only Skinner's radical behaviorism has proposed to redesign society"), some pretty unclear phrasing ("Not too different from Walden Two's Managers and Planners, and Frazier, Skinner's avatar and leader of the community"), and a generally rather unencyclopedic tone in my opinion (e.g. "There is some irony in Skinner's choice"), that looks more like literary analysis - not review, exactly, but kind of similar - than an actual description or listing of the book's critiques or opinions about it. Not sure how to fix it; I certainly don't know about the book myself all that much, and while I don't believe it's necessarily unsalvageable, it looks like it needs a rewrite. LaughingManiac (talk) 17:13, 23 May 2023 (UTC)