Behavioristic explanations of human behavior

(Deterministic) Behavioristic explanations of human behavior are often criticized as presenting a negative view of humanity and "stripping humanity of dignity" (Jones and Butman).

What are meant by these criticisms?

I believe most people are inferring determinism when they inject behavioristic explanations. When people use deterministic language to describe behavior it is usually based on what is believed to be empirical scientific data. To put it more simply, we can say that they have faith in the same causes to produce the same effects time after time after time. This idea is closely tied to what some refer to as the laws of nature. The natural law tells us that all behavior can be predicted via causes and effects. From a deterministic perspective, an action is a necessary outcome of a prior desire or drive. Determinism says that the only way an action, produced by a desire, could be different, is if a stronger desire comes along. If this is the case, that means that experience, reason, and memory really do not play a role in behavior. That takes us to a whole new level. If determinism is the true view of behavior, can a person ever be responsible, not only for their actions, but even for the ideas in their head? I believe that even the most benign action is preceded by a moment when a person could decide not to yield to a desire or give in to an idea. If I am aiming a gun at someone, I could, at any second, shoot or not. In the second or split second prior to whatever decision I would make, I am free to do either. I am also responsible for both decisions no matter which action I chose. If determinism ruled my behavior, I would shoot if that was my desire, and the only way I would not shoot is if my pulling of the trigger was prevented by a stronger action like someone taking the gun away. However, if my behavior is not determined, I might stop and reflect on the situation, and change my mind (my new desired outcome). Funny thing is I still have yielded to a desired outcome, so is that decision determined? To conclude this idea the deterministic view would continue to maintain all is just giving in to the strongest desire. But the “free will” view would argue that my inner-self chooses the best action.

Does the idea of determinism, and its implied power to predict behavior, affect a person’s freedom?

The notion of predictability should be understood as logical and should not be feared. It is as conceivable to say that given the initial condition of a person and complete knowledge of the laws of nature, we may be able to predict his behavior as it is conceivable to claim that a husband or wife of thirty years could, with great accuracy, predict his or hers spouse’s behavior in any given situation.

In a mere human mechanical sense, choosing according to our greatest benefit might very well be the natural boundary of our freedom by virtue of the limited power that we assert, power that is both physically and jurisdictionally limited mostly to ourselves. A resolution should therefore consider a compatible existence of both freedom and a deterministic nature. It can hold a definition of freedom that is not about choosing in any other way then we do, but about being able to follow our desires (as well as our “counter-desires”). In this case the deterministic nature of the world only aids us in reasoning our actions according to a desired outcome.