A philosophical psychology of the early 1900s led to behaviorism with Watson and Skinner.
Behaviorism is all about stimulus-response, reward-punishment, and how these lead to observable, quantifiable behaviors. It's about radical environmentalism: almost nothing innate; all about the environmental shaping that explains behavior and life outcomes.
Behaviorists were really in to reinforcementtheory.
There are other, non-FAP behaviors that ethologists study and make sense of, but FAPs provide a good example for understanding the later questions of ethology.
What is the adaptive value of the behavior? Why do they do it? What happens in its absence?
Sociobiologists framed in terms of reproductive success, of course. Ethologists are more about doing experiments in the field to literally see the adaptive value in nature.
Example: FAP of gulls turning over egg shells, speckled side up. They carry it out for speckled cardboard, etc. This provides camouflage from raptor predators and white side up makes them easier predatory targets.
Example: waggle dance of bees. A FAP in response to finding food. Useful in that it directs other bees to the food. But how do you know? Get in there and do ethological experiments! Rotate the hive so the directional information is opposite. Or switch where "the sun" is by having a bright light in a different direction.
What in the external world caused the behavior?
This is the realm of releasing stimuli (RS): the stimulus in the environment that triggers a FAP.
How do we know what the RS is? Example of the red dot on bird beaks (the RS) that baby birds peck (the FAP)