Grand Theory Paper: Harry Harlow

1718 Words7 Pages
Harry Israel—he would not have his well-known surname until later on—was born on of all days—considering his personality—on Halloween evening, October 31st, 1905, at his home in Fairfield, Iowa. He was of course fascinated with science and experimenting even at a young age—he owned a child’s porcelain potty when he was a child and he would experiment with dropping a large stone to see what would happen. Harry would recount in his later years that he hit “rock bottom”—he was a man who knew no bounds in effortless puns and unorthodox humor, especially given his astounding-unorthodox theories that went totally against the then current dogma of the theory known as behaviorism (Blum 9).

Harry Harlow’s parents, Alonzo Harlow Israel and Mable
…show more content…
food, or oral stimulation, was the primary driving force of the infant rhesus monkeys need for their mother, and thus the mother’s affection was the source for their secondary drive). Harlow also decided to disprove the theory of behaviorist theories such as classical conditioning. He sought to disregard the theories bought forth by such people as B.F. Skinner and John Watson—he thought of them as too cold and mechanical to be thought of as an explanation for our growth and development. Therefore, as Harlow puts it, “these theories limit our understanding of the cognitive capabilities of our species” (qtd. in Suomi, Horst, and Veer 358).
The birth of Attachment theory began when Harlow realized that by studying the rhesus monkey you learn more about human behavior than by studying rats—Harlow believed that you could not test humans well because of the fact that it leads to ethical and scientific dilemmas. Therefore, with these notions in mind, he set out to find his hypothesis and disprove the dominating theories of his time—no easy task. Harlow poised his hypothesis on the fact that when you remove all social contact from the rhesus monkey they then start to develop psychopathology—as Harlow would say, “that this just goes to show that one can not have a psychosis unless there is a psychiatrist around to diagnose it” (Suomi, Horst, and Veer 359). Thus, his meaning was that social
Open Document