Taking hermeneutics to science: Prospects and tactics suggested by the work of B. F. Skinner.

Miller (1994) reads Skinner through the lens of hermeneutics. Hermeneutics is the art of interpreting texts and human action. The paper asks: what happens if we treat Skinner’s science as an act of interpretation?

It maps points where radical behaviorism and hermeneutics overlap. Both focus on context, history, and the function of signs. No data were collected; the work is pure conceptual analysis.

The author shows that "selection by consequences" is itself an interpretive move. We look at behavior, then interpret its past contingencies.

This stance keeps Skinner anti-mental while still allowing rich, qualitative description of meaning. The paper claims the two views can live together without contradiction.

Grant (1989) and Stemmer (1992) laid the groundwork. Grant (1989) argued verbal behavior is just more environmental data. Stemmer (1992) said inner events are also environmental. Miller (1994) extends both by adding an interpretive layer.

Catania (2023) later widens the same bridge. It invites behavior analysts to speak with philosophers on causation and mind. Miller (1994) is an early step on that bridge.

No clash appears. The papers differ in focus, not in core philosophy. Each keeps selectionist, anti-mental roots while exploring new language games.

You can borrow hermeneutic tools without going mentalistic. When you write a functional assessment, treat caregiver reports as texts. Ask: what history makes this story useful? The move sharpens context analysis and keeps you inside a radical behaviorist frame.