December 5, 2013

December 5, 2013 

Written by Maximus Peperkamp, M.S. Verbal Behaviorist

Dear Reader, 

 v

In the same way this writer emphasizes specifics about spoken communication, others are convinced, based on their experience, that they know what interaction is all about. Although they may not be explicit about how what they consider to be objective knowledge derives from their experience, this is the reason they push only their view and remain incapable of considering or incorporating views and experiences of others. It is evident, however, that our different views are based on our different experiences. Because individuals have unique reinforcement histories, also what they consider to be objective knowledge is expressed, interpreted and used in different ways.

Since most scholars mainly read, study, and write and seldom communicate with each other, and even if they talk only talk with someone who thinks more or less exactly like them, there is little conversation in academia about the functional relationship between personal experience and knowledge. The fact that what one pursues scientifically or academically is personally enhancing is down played. Yet, the insolated world of scientists is as much, or even more, based on Noxious Verbal Behavior (NVB) then the world of the less educated. When it comes to how we communicate, there is no significant difference between the scientist and the non-scientist. The absence of knowledge about Sound Verbal Behavior (SVB) in both groups is apparent in their mutual agreement that knowing and understanding is valued more than experience. Educated and non-educated people claim that some sort of knowledge or higher power is above what they themselves experience.It makes no difference whether we believe this imaginary entity to exist outside or outside of ourselves.

During Sound Verbal Behavior (SVB) there is a tangible individual experience of well-being. Without this individual experience there can be no SVB. When we do not feel safe, at ease, calm and connected with one another, we produce NVB. In SVB we check in with each other again and again whether we are still connected, but in NVB there is no such verification process going on. In NVB it is supposedly not important what we feel. In NVB we don’t care about what the other person feels. In NVB we assume that we can keep our feelings out of the conversation, because, supposedly, they make the conversation more difficult or unscientific. We are referring here to the uncontrollability of our emotions, which can get us carried away.  

  

Ironically, the notion that we can keep our experiences and our emotions out of the conversation has led to expulsion of our positive emotions, but the acceptance of our negative emotions. Consequently, NVB reins almost everywhere. No matter how much we complain or protest about, we still keep producing more NVB. Since SVB signifies subsidence and absence of negative emotions, it is considered by most people to be impossible and idealistic. This falsehood is bestowed on us by NVB. It is absolutely possible to communicate without any negative emotion. Such communication, which signifies that we are happy, has led and will lead to discoveries, which could not be made otherwise. Getting rid of the false notion that we can be without emotion, is an important step in the direction of SVB. We cannot be without emotion, but we can definitely be without negative emotion. Our ability to be without negative emotions is very reinforcing. We will have good communication as long as we experience positive emotion. Communication breaks down when we feel and express negative emotions.

    

NVB is the spoken communication which is based on the expression of negative emotions. It goes on everywhere.  We have accepted NVB as our normal a way of communicating, but it is abnormal: NVB makes us and keeps us unhappy. Since NVB is also disembodied communication, we do not have any conscious experience of our body, while we speak. If we did, we would be able to express this experience, but since we don’t, we can’t express this unconscious experience. Thus, NVB is based on the unconscious experience of our physical discomfort. We only realize this once we are out of it and change to SVB, our only way out. NVB is easier to be recognized in others than SVB. SVB can be recognized in others, but is easier to be recognized in our selves. Unless SVB is recognized in ourselves, we will not be able to continue it. 

SVB is scientific in that it elaborates on the functional relationship between variables in our environment, other communicators, and  how we communicate. Based on the ubiquity of negative emotions, perpetuated by NVB, there is a lack of knowledge about subjective experience. By attaining SVB this lack of knowledge will be acknowledged and dissolved. In SVB there is an alignment between what we say and how we say it, between our verbal and nonverbal expressions, between objective knowledge and our subjective experiences. In effect, SVB is predicted to revolutionize human interaction and relationship. Change in one event, communication, the dependent variable, can be produced by change in another event, the sound of our voice, the independent variable.