I agree with you in terms of the problems to relate both approaches. I think that the expression, "phenomenological behaviourism", was and is intresting as it seems to point to something true. But I think it is just the top of the iceberg. Indeed I think it is a bad expression, because it express a contradiction in terms, "phenomenological" & "behaviourism". I think that Fritz was trying to say something intresting but didn't create a good expression. But another contradiction in terms, similar to this in an intresting sense, seems to be the word PHENOMENOLOGY. PHENOMENO + LOGOS. Isn't it? The conception of terms are from different spheres. The "phenomenon" from the sphere of the phenomenal, experiencial, existential, pre-reflexive, pre-conceptual, pre-theorethical one. And the "Logos", specifically from the reflexive, theorising sphere. More: I only can apprehend, understand, a phenomeno if I alow it to happen, to unfold, if I allow, and am, its specific action and becoming as me myself. So a "phenomenology" only is possible IF PHENOMENACTION and expression is possible. Better PHENOMENOLOGY IS SPECIFICALLY PHENOMENACTION. With this word I think I come to invent the whell!!! Because this meaning seems to be implicit in the word GESTALT. Isn't it? Afonso.