Unit IX
The
Question of Freedom (go back)
(Chapters 29-31)
The problem of free will
versus determinism is a fundamental issue in Walden Two. The purpose in this unit is to demonstrate
that everyone is controlled in one way or another. Through the use of positive reinforcement, rather than
punishment, people have the feeling of freedom.
Summary
Since his arrival at Walden
Two, Castle has been waiting to discuss the "general issues" mentioned
earlier. When the young couples leave
for a concert, he and Burris go to Frazier's personal room, where he broaches
the subject again, beginning a long debate with Frazier. "I accuse you of one of the most
diabolical machinations in the history of mankind!"
Castle explains that the
structure of the community is misleading because it appears that Frazier has no
power, no current contact with its members.
In the beginning, however, he was a despot. He set things up so that eventually he could withdraw himself as
a force.
Frazier denies having
current power and being a despot. He
does admit that he exerted an early influence.
Nevertheless, he planned Walden Two as a scientist. "What would you do," he asks,
"if you found yourself in possession of an effective science of
behavior?"
Castle would dump it in the
ocean in favor of giving people their freedom.
Frazier answers that Castle then would leave control to the charlatan,
the bully, the demagogue, the salesman, and others already knowledgeable about
the techniques of behavioral engineering.
As long as there is a trace
of personal freedom, Castle declares, he will maintain his position. Frazier, in response, denies that freedom
exists at all.
They decide to classify the
determiners of human behavior. First,
there are physical restraints, such as handcuffs and iron bars. Second, there is the threat of force. At this point Castle says that he sees no
other possibilities, but Frazier says there is tremendous power of another
sort. He is referring to positive
control.
A person's behavior can be
controlled, he explains, by creating situations he likes or by taking him out
of situations he does not like. He will
behave as we want him to if we create positive outcomes, thereby increasing
the probability that he will behave that way again. This procedure is called positive reinforcement.
Punishment often appears
successful because the behavior is temporarily suppressed, but in the long run
it has many undesirable consequences and also is ineffective. The person's potential behavior has not been altered-he will still want to
repeat the act. The immediate but
temporary effect of using punishment, Frazier explains, often overshadows the
long-term advantage of positive reinforcement.
78
Restraint is one form of
control, continues Frazier, but absence of restraint is not freedom. There are still compelling forces at work.
People perceive themselves
to be free when there is no restraint or no threat of force, but they neglect
to examine the positive control of behavior.
We never rebel against these forces, he explains, partly because we are
not so aware of them, partly because we have no adequate vocabulary for
talking about them. It is curious, he
concludes, that the question of freedom never arises with positive
reinforcement.
He boasts a bit about Walden
Two. "By skillful planning, by a
wise choice of techniques we increase the
feeling of freedom."
Castle returns to his
concern about power, asserting that Frazier is in complete control, a
long-range dictator. Frazier is
inclined to agree. Once a person has
grasped the principle of positive reinforcement, he can enjoy almost unlimited
power. But this power is not despotism;
it must be used for the good of others.
When it is not, it is reduced by a corresponding amount, says Frazier.
Castle then turns from
despotism to democracy, and Frazier counters that democracy is ineffective. No person has a chance of deciding the issue
in a national election; the general population is not in a position to
evaluate the candidates anyway; and the candidates, when elected, cannot
experiment for fear of being voted out of office. They simply maintain the status quo.
What we need, Frazier says, is a government for the benefit of
all-both the majority and the minority.
Walden Two, he claims, is closer to the ideal democracy than is
democracy in America today, in which election campaigns falsify or obscure the
issues. Members of Walden Two do not
want an active part in government but merely a guarantee of personal rights,
including the opportunity to protest unsatisfactory conditions. No one worries about the operation of the
government any more than about the operation of a diesel engine. Both are left to experts.
Castle counters that despots
might arise. Frazier agrees that
despotic cultures can last for some time, but eventually they are replaced by
competing cultures which work more efficiently. The Planners in Walden Two, understanding this principle, avoid
the usurpation of power, which would only destroy the community.
They might abscond with
funds, Castle retorts. Our only wealth
is our happiness, Frazier replies. The
physical plant, without its members, is practically worthless.
"But it's human to dominate,"
says Castle.
"That's an experimental
question," Frazier responds.
The Planners, Frazier
emphasizes, rule through positive reinforcement. They have no machinery for threat or force. To extend their powers they would need to
create more and more satisfying conditions, a curious despotism.
79
Democracy, he continues, is
clearly superior to despotism, as demonstrated in World War II, but it is not
the best form of government because it is based on a scientifically invalid
concept, the inherent goodness and wisdom of humanity. Democracy ignores the fact that people are
made wise and good or foolish and bad by their environments.
Burris points out that
people mold the environment and the environment molds people. Which comes first? For Frazier, the question is irrelevant. A beginning has been made; now the problem
is to develop the environment in socially useful ways.
Finally, when Burris
suggests a resemblance between Russian communism and Walden Two, Frazier states
that the Russian plan, as originally conceived, had good potential. But it developed four fundamental
weaknesses: (1) a decline in the experimental spirit, which prevents further
progress; (2) overpropagandizement of its people and outsiders, suppressing
evaluation of its success; (3) the use of heroes, making the process of
government an art, rather than a science; and (4) continued use of power, a
temporary expedient at the outset but now inappropriate and
self-defeating.
These conditions leave the Russians far from a culture with a common
good. The
people do not behave as they want to, says Frazier
angrily, spitting into a flowerpot. (Chapter 29)
Burris decides that Castle
is right, that Frazier prefers to avoid general issues, founding Walden Two on
specific behavioral techniques. Burris
agrees, furthermore, that the issue of freedom might never arise in Walden Two
and that Castle's concern about despotism might be simply a practical problem
in defining the roles of the Managers.
The animated discussion had
not added to the visitors’ understanding of Walden Two, however. With Frazier leading the way, the trio
proceeds to the common rooms, where they observe people enjoying
themselves. As Frazier leaves his
guests, he makes a date for dining with them at seven. (Chapter 30)
After the simple Sunday
night supper, Burris and Castle take a stroll.
Castle thinks he won the debate, Burris decides, and Frazier probably
thinks the same of himself. The philosopher
and behavioral scientist never met on the same field.
The pair return to their
room, where Castle begins grading term papers and a thoughtful Burris lies on
his bunk. He is in a turmoil about
Walden Two. (Chapter 31)
80
Key Concepts
Write a definition for each of these terms. When in doubt, reread the indicated pages in
Walden
Two and consult the glossary in
this guidebook.
81
Illustrations
The concepts in Walden Two are often illustrated in daily
life. Below are students' illustrations
of three concepts in this unit. Supply
additional examples yourself of these or other key concepts in this unit.
Freedom (240). "In high school I
had a teacher whose methods were drastically different from those used by the
rest of the faculty. It was the same
school, same students, and the objectives of this teacher and the rest of the
faculty were the same-to create the best possible learning environment.
"In the other classes,
we never felt free to make the decision to attend class or complete the
homework assignments. It felt like we
were under the rule of dictators. Failure
to adhere to the rules resulted in detention or loss of privileges. To obtain a good grade we had to be
obedient. We did not feel free and
behaved in ways that interfered with our learning process and at times disrupted
the class.
"This one teacher
didn't enforce all of the school policies.
If a class was missed he did not care if it was unexcused or if the
student had a legitimate excuse. His
policy was if more than three classes were missed, five points were deducted
from the final grade. This gave us a
sense of freedom. We could decide
whether or not to attend class without the threat of the usual disciplinary
measures. However, he prepared the
class so we benefited by choosing to attend.
For example there were usually two quizzes each week; if the reading
assignment was done each quiz was so easy it was almost a gift, an automatic A.
He also structured the writing assignments so they were easier if we had
participated in class discussion.
"Although we felt free
to attend or not attend class and to do or not do the homework assignment, the
teacher carefully designed the class so we chose to do both. The only difference between the typical
class and his was the environment. One
robbed us of the feeling of freedom and the other, although we were controlled,
gave a sense of freedom and encouraged us to do what the teacher wanted us to
do-learn."
Reinforcement theory (244).
"Two years ago, as a counselor at an all-boys camp, I was in charge
of eight boys, all about ten years old.
The kids were pretty well behaved-with the exception of one boy named
Sam. He was an overweight,
uncoordinated child who was very insecure in the presence of his peers. He alleviated his insecurity by talking back
to me and by using bad language, thereby demonstrating to his peers how
'mature' he was.
"It was a very
difficult task deciding how I should attempt to change his behavior. I tried a few methods which proved
unsuccessful, but then I realized that Sam's rudeness only resulted from his
desire for the attention of his peers, and so I decided to approach the problem
using this as reinforcement.
"I
asked for the cooperation of the other members of the cabin and this was how I
set it up: Whenever Sam talked back to me, his peers were to give him the
‘silent treatment,’ ignoring him. Sam
at first did not change his ways.
Rather, he increased his obnoxious fits. However, after a couple of days, he became less prone to
rudeness. At the same time, I was
careful to be extra nice whenever he behaved more normally to me. I quickly encouraged him at all
opportunities, which were rare at first.
"With
this 'punishment' from his peers and my support for politeness, eventually he
became a fairly agreeable kid. The
change was really unbelievable."
82
Punishment (244). "When I was a
pre-teen I had an insatiable urge to swipe stuff from shopkeepers in my
neighborhood. I would go out at dusk
with my usual companion and knock off three or four places in the course of an
hour. Over the summer duping the store
owners as well as my parents led to a more cocky and relaxed style of this
illegal act. Ultimately I got caught
one night by my father, who found me with several magazines, handkerchiefs,
pens, and even food in my pockets and under my coat. He reprimanded me thoroughly and lectured me on the dangers of my
ways.
"I laid low for two
nights, surfaced on the third, and subsequently got caught by a newly installed
television alarm in my neighbors' appliance store. This time I was escorted home by two policemen who strongly
suggested to my father that I be grounded or locked in the basement for my
disorderly conduct. At this point my
father shouted, swiftly spanked me, and sent me to my room for an undisclosed
amount of time.
"Within a few weeks the
dust had settled. I was back on the
outside scanning new places for my rip-offs.
The spanking didn't alter my desire; it just momentarily curbed
it."
83
Study Questions
1. "I think I would dump your science of behavior in the
ocean," Castle says to Frazier.
What do you think? Would people
gain freedom if the behavioral sciences were discarded? WW.
(240)
2. Describe the incident with the falling book of matches. What is Frazier's claim? Castle's claim? Your view? (242)
3. Explain the difference in outcome, according to Frazier, between
positive reinforcement and punishment. (244)
4. "Absence of restraint," according to Frazier,
"isn't freedom." Explain his viewpoint, including in your answer
some reference to his complaint about the vocabulary of freedom. (247)
5. "By a wise choice of techniques," says Frazier,
"we increase the feeling of
freedom." What does he mean? Give
an example showing how he might increase a person's feeling of freedom, yet
still influence that person's behavior. (248)
6. Castle says: "It's human to dominate in any culture."
Frazier replies: "That's an experimental question, Mr. Castle." What
does Frazier mean? Explain what he
might do. (256)
7. There are four weaknesses in the communist programs in Russia,
according to Frazier. What are
they? How are they related? (258)
8. Castle is concerned about "general issues" in Walden
Two. What does he seem to mean? Explain
your answer with references to the different personal styles, thoughts, and
interests of Castle and Frazier. (236, 260)
9. What is a fascist? Do
you regard Frazier as a fascist?
Discuss the use of this word, indicating its advantages and
disadvantages. (264)
10.
Does Castle feel that any government can function without force? Do you agree? Why? (265)
84
Values Clarification
The Frazier-Castle dialogues
move to Frazier's private room. Time is
running short, the question of freedom remains, and Frazier concentrates on
the two professors, Castle and Burris.
Freedom does not exist, he
declares. The absence of restraint is
not freedom. He has some very definite
ideas:
1. On who manipulates
behavior: "The charlatan, the demagogue, the salesman, the ward healer,
the bully, the cheat, the educator, the priest-all who are in possession of the
techniques of behavioral engineering." (240)
2. On the need to control behavior: "The fact
is, we not only can control human
behavior, we
must." (241)
3. On free will: "I deny that freedom exists at all." (241)
4. On positive reinforcement: "By using the principle of positive
reinforcement carefully
avoiding
force or the threat of force-we can preserve a personal sense of freedom."
(248)
These remarks pertain to the
philosophical question of free will versus determinism, a most important issue
in thinking about a better world. With
which comment do you agree most? Write
"NOW" preceding that remark.
Think of yourself in ten
years or so. With which comment will
you agree most at that time? Write
"LATER" preceding that comment, which may or may not be the same comment
marked earlier.
During adulthood, people
change less rapidly than during childhood.
Hence, your two responses may be the same. If so, indicate the reasons for your choice and the factors which
influenced this constancy. If your
choices were different, summarize and explain the reasons for this difference.