Oct 17, 2026 · 25 min · 9 segments
The provided sources explore the **transformation of stimulus function** through the combined frameworks of **Functional Contextualism** and **Relational Frame Theory**. They explain how human…
Todd SchmenkHostWell, to understand this framework, which is rooted in a philosophy called functional contextualism or FC, we have to kind of completely shift how we view human behavior.
So in traditional medical models, we often look at the form of a behavior.
We look at what it looks like on the outside, how often it happens or, you know, what specific diagnostic category it fits into.
Exactly.
What matters is not what a behavior looks like, but what it does, its function.
We are looking at what it produces, what it avoids, and how it is shaped by a person's history and their current situation.
Precisely.
Which brings us to the basic mechanics of how we learn to suffer in the first place, right? Long before we ever step foot in a therapist's office.
Yeah, we have to look at the baseline conditioning.
Right, because if we look back at old school psychology like Pavlov's dog or basic classical and operant conditioning, learning required direct physical experience.
A dog hears a bell, gets fed a piece of meat, and eventually learns to drool at the sound of the bell.
Or an animal gets a mild shock after a tone and, you know, learns to fear the tone.
You have to physically experience the pain or the reward to actually learn the response.
And that direct conditioning was the primary model for a very long time.
But it failed to explain the sheer flexibility and, frankly, the unique vulnerability of human beings.
Exactly.
Because of language, humans possess this massive psychological loophole.
Well, to understand this framework, which is rooted in a philosophy called functional contextualism or FC, we have to kind of completely shift how we view human behavior.
So in traditional medical models, we often look at the form of a behavior.
We look at what it looks like on the outside, how often it happens or, you know, what specific diagnostic category it fits into.
Exactly.
What matters is not what a behavior looks like, but what it does, its function.
We are looking at what it produces, what it avoids, and how it is shaped by a person's history and their current situation.
Precisely.
Which brings us to the basic mechanics of how we learn to suffer in the first place, right? Long before we ever step foot in a therapist's office.
Yeah, we have to look at the baseline conditioning.
Right, because if we look back at old school psychology like Pavlov's dog or basic classical and operant conditioning, learning required direct physical experience.
A dog hears a bell, gets fed a piece of meat, and eventually learns to drool at the sound of the bell.
Or an animal gets a mild shock after a tone and, you know, learns to fear the tone.
You have to physically experience the pain or the reward to actually learn the response.
And that direct conditioning was the primary model for a very long time.
But it failed to explain the sheer flexibility and, frankly, the unique vulnerability of human beings.
Exactly.
Because of language, humans possess this massive psychological loophole.
The rest of this transcript — segmented and speaker-labeled, so you land on the exact moment something was said
Search every transcript — by keyword, by phrase, or by meaning, across every show Radar indexes
Trends — what is surging across podcasts, measured against its own baseline
Alerts — when a name you follow appears in a newly indexed episode
No account is needed to search Radar.