Would you consider an individual demonstrating a troubling behavioral pattern to be a flawed individual while taking a radical behavioral perspective?
No. I would not perceive a person demonstrating a troubling behavioral pattern as a flawed individual. This is because radical behaviorism presents extra additional mechanisms by which to classify such incidences of behavioral dispositions. In particular, radical behaviorism is a psychological concept that assesses individuals’ behavioral dispositions based on different environmental factors. From a radical behaviorism perspective, an individual’s behavior is increasingly influenced through conditioning. The concept of radical behaviorism emphasizes that human behaviors manifest and develop from perpetual exposure to certain environmental conditioning factors (Mayer, 2012). Conditioning of a person harbors the potential to reinforce previously absent attitudes and habits into becoming a key part of their behavioral disposition. From this standpoint, I can never consider the conditioning of an individual into conforming to a foreign habitual tendency to be flawed.
Would you consider the behavior pattern to be their “fault?” Why or why not?
I would not consider the behavioral patterns displayed by reinforced persons as their fault. Reinforcement is one of the best ways that a person adapts to numerous types of desirable behavioral outcomes (Mayer, 2012). Naturally, environment greatly affects how people behave later in life. With that said, the behaviors of different people largely change because of an interplay of factors including genetic and environmental. Conditioning a person’s behavior is one of the primary types of behaviorism. It majorly involves reinforcing a person to conform to certain types of behavioral responses based entirely from the repeated exposure to specific stimuli that permanently within the psyche of the conditioned individual.
Mayer, G. R., Sulzer-Azaroff, B., & Wallace, M. (2012). Behavior analysis for lasting change. Sloan Pub..