April 11, 2014

April 11, 2014

Written by Maximus Peperkamp, M.S. Verbal Behaviorist

Dear Reader, 

 

I have always been writing about the same process. I can speak about it as well, but I want the reader to know that speaking about it is completely different from writing about it. This writing about speaking is not the same as speaking about speaking. Writing about speaking easily derails into writing about writing, which, paradoxically, may make the reader think that the author is speaking about speaking. Speaking about speaking isn’t possible in writing. 

I am writing about the mistaken notion that the reader thinks that he or she is experiencing speaking. Although I am writing about speaking, I don’t want the reader to think that I am speaking. I am not speaking when I am writing these words. When the reader reads these words, the reader is not engaging in a conversation with me. When I write these words, I am not talking with the reader. Because I am not speaking, my focus to write about speaking changes into writing about writing, even without me noticing it. It is difficult to write about speaking without losing track of the simple fact that one is only writing and not speaking.  

Perhaps the reader doesn’t care about this distinction? Perhaps the reader imagines that I am speaking with him or with her? Perhaps the reader reads something into these words, which wasn’t written, and, more importantly, which couldn’t be written? Perhaps the reader has been fooling him or herself all along that not only this writer, but any other writer was speaking with him or her, when in fact nothing like this was ever the case? Perhaps, all our books and all our written publications have totally distracted us from the fact that we are not talking?

Most writing is based on the illusion that we are having a conversation. Writers maintain this illusion because they remain unaware of the obvious, yet easily missed fact that they are only writing. So, the writer and the reader actually engage in a follies a deux, a shared illusion. Given the way in which we communicate, it is not surprising that most of our writing and most of our reading is that way. Perhaps it is so hard for us to see that writing isn’t speaking and that reading isn’t the same as being part of a conversation, because the way in which we usually communicate itself is already creating the illusion that we are having real interaction?  

I think that most of our communication is not communication at all, but only the pretention of communication. I call it Noxious Verbal Behavior (NVB). I call it NVB because it doesn’t sound good. If you would care to listen, you would agree with me. I don’t know if we will have the chance to explore this while we speak with each other, but I hope we do. If you don’t agree with me, you are only disagreeing with this writing. If you don’t agree with my written opinion, that most spoken communication isn’t spoken communication, please realize that what is written here isn’t spoken communication. Disagreeing with me in spoken communication is something entirely different from disagreeing with me in writing. All our disagreements in writing have taken our attention away from the obvious, but easily ignored fact of life that we still need to talk with each other. Just as students postpone doing their homework, we are dragging our heels, we procrastinate by reading, but we don’t talk.  

The writing which mostly distracts us from speaking is the writing which makes us believe that we are speaking. Our eagerness to believe this complicated illusion is based on our hunger for interaction. Since this need was not fulfilled by conversation with others, this unfulfilled need can be exploited by writers. Most reading is because of our unfulfilled need for interaction. If we knew that we were being bamboozled, we would read less and talk more, but the opposite is the case, we read more and we talk less and the little talking we do is mainly NVB. 

  

Do you see, my dear reader, how easy it is to believe that I am talking with you, while you are only reading something which was written? Do you realize that the more entrenched this tragic illusion becomes, the more what is written is only about what is written and what is read is only about what is written about what is written and completely dissociates you from the reality? Do you notice while you are reading these words that you understand something which perhaps before you didn’t understand? Are ready to talk about mis-understanding? In Sound Verbal Behavior (SVB), we talk about these matters. Moreover, in SVB, we recognize that for the most part, human interaction hasn’t happened yet. When SVB is happening, you can’t help but notice how little it has been happening and how good it is that it is actually happening. 

This writing may make you interested in SVB, but to engage in SVB is entirely different than to  read about it. To have it, skills are needed, which you can’t develop by reading about it. It is huge misunderstanding to think that we become more informed. Our communication skills are not cultivated by what we read. To improve our communication skills, we must be speaking about speaking, not reading about writing about writing. We must engage in spoken communication long enough to be able to speak about speaking and we must stop being afraid to speak about speaking about speaking. Our fear of speaking is because we were not listened to. Our fear of speaking has made us into readers, not speakers. Those who do most of the talking fear SVB,  because their NVB is being exposed. Those who do most of the writing are the least interested in having a conversation, even if they proclaim to be writing about it. I want to have SVB with you.