The Political Construction of the “Self” in Radical Behaviorism: Oppression, Submission, and Subversion

Abstract

Even though it is not a philosophy centered on the self, Radical Behaviorism can discuss this notion. From a behaviorist perspective, the self can be understood as a complex verbal repertoire composed of self-knowledge, self-control, and ethical self-government (in some cases, countercontrol). As it is a verbal repertoire, the self has a social genesis. This thesis allows a political analysis, recognizing that power relations permeate the social contingencies responsible for the constitution of the self. However, a radically social conception of the self, such as that proposed by Skinnerian behaviorism, raises a political problem: if the social environment entirely determines the self, where would the eventual “will” to break with this system come from, such as that displayed by “selves” engaged in political change? At first glance, the possibility of transformative political action seems to require maintaining a decontextualized notion of self, i.e., an initiating self. This conclusion seems to question the possibility of Radical Behaviorism accounting for a politically active self. Considering that difficulty, this paper proposes a political interpretation of the self in Radical Behaviorism, keeping the possibility of a transformative political action on the horizon. For that, we examine how oppressed “selves” are made submissive and how certain contingencies allow the emergence of subversive “selves,” which oppose the system of domination. The constitution of this disobedient self depends on contingencies different from those formally organized by powerful controlling agencies, such as government, religion, and, mainly, the economy. A subversive self also requires a “broader” repertoire of self-knowledge, including discrimination of the control these powerful agencies promote. Finally, the subversive self also exhibits a well-established repertoire of self-control, since acting against institutional control is very likely to produce immediate aversive consequences. We conclude that the analysis of the contingencies responsible for the constitution of a subversive self allows us to speak of a politically active self in Radical Behaviorism.