This article presents the argument by the authors regarding the article of Uttal (2004), which lays forth several, rightly justified, caveats in the pursuit of elucidating the neural basis of higher cognitive functions using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). Adding to the onslaught of criticism from cellular physiologists, Uttal's central tenet is that the increased utilization of this new technology may be "ill advised," and should be replaced with more effort and time being directed towards a "revitalized behaviorism." The authors contend that it is not the methodology of fMRI itself but the "application" of fMRI to unravel more intangible cognitive phenomena that is ill advised. Specifically, they believe that Uttal has mistakenly disregarded the potential role that fMRI research could make in the advancement of behavioral science.