rack” and the jocular tone in which they report on the
“favoritetricks”ofthefemalemonkeysbornasaresultofits
use.
Detachmentismadeeasierbytheuseoftechnicaljargonthat
disguises the real nature of what is going on. Psychologists,
undertheinfluenceofthebehavioristdoctrinethatonlywhat
can be observed should be mentioned, have developed a
considerable collection of termsthat refer to pain without
appearingtodoso.AliceHeim,oneofthefewpsychologists
who has spoken out against the pointless animal
experimentation of her colleagues, describes it this way:
The work on “animal behavior” is always expressed in
scientific,hygienic-soundingterminology,whichenablesthe
indoctrinationofthenormal,non-sadisticyoungpsychology
studenttoproceedwithouthisanxietybeingaroused. Thus
techniques of “extinction” are used for what is in fact
torturing by thirst or near starvation or electric-shocking;
“partialreinforcement”isthetermforfrustratingananimal
by only occasionally fulfilling the expectations which the
experimenterhasarousedintheanimalbyprevioustraining;
“negativestimulus”isthetermusedforsubjectingananimal
to a stimulus which he avoids, if possible. The term
“avoidance”isO.K.becauseitisanobservableactivity.The
term“painful”or“frightening”stimulusarelessO.K.since
they areanthropomorphic, they imply that the animal has
feelings—andthat thesemaybe similarto humanfeelings.
This is not allowable because it is non-behavioristic and
unscientific(and alsobecausethis mightdetertheyounger
and less hard-boiled researcher from pursuing certain
ingeniousexperiments. Hemight allowa little playto his
imagination). The cardinal sin for the experimental