June 7, 2014

June 7, 2014

Written by Maximus Peperkamp, M.S. Verbal Behaviorist

Dear Reader, 

This author was watching a movie in which three men, who had robbed a bank, were being chased in cars by the police. Since they were fleeing to their familiar neighborhoods and news helicopters were following the situation from the air in real time, local gang members got the idea to kill them and steal their money for themselves. The three men tried to escape from house to house, running through kitchens, bedrooms and back yards. Their goal was to find their way to some criminal friend, who owed them a favor. He would be able to take them in his car and transport them to safety. They were constantly shooting and killing innocent people in the process and they were wondering and arguing whether the whole ordeal they had gotten themselves into was even worth it. They also got shot up and wounded themselves, but had to keep going. While trying to fight their way out of another life and death situation one of them said with a smile “there are no problems because there are no morals and there is no hope.” 

This movie illustrates this author’s previous remarks that what appears to be verbal often expresses something nonverbal. There were moments in which the gangsters were catching their breath, sharing a feeling of togetherness, while talking and reminiscing about their past and their girlfriends. During these moments they were temporarily verbal. It seemed as if the only life worth living was a verbal life. Although one of them got killed, two of them made it out. This author was writing yesterday about the escape from the nonverbal and the approach of the verbal. On the one hand, these criminals were escaping from the fact that they were being chased by police and by other gang members, the former trying to imprison them to possibly give them the death penalty, the latter trying to kill them and take their bag of money. On the other hand, they were trying to think out loud and negotiate with each other every choice they made. 

The gang members had taken the little brother of one of the three men hostage and contacted them by cell phone to demand their money. In a weird kind of way the three men now realized that they went through all of this hassle to save the little brother’s life, but he got killed anyway because their verbal behavior repertoires weren’t sufficiently developed to bring him to safety. Instead, another boy, also victimized during this whole terrible ordeal, because his father, who had tried to teach him right from wrong, was killed in front of his eyes, got saved. In spite of the chaos, some weird kind of verbal teaching about right and wrong survived. 

In this raw drama there were numerous examples of failed attempts to be verbal. Each of the men had their own troubles with their wives and with other people they grew up with. Their culture, portrayed by this movie, was one of loyalty to family and to friends, but also one in which men don’t talk with women. Much of the so-called action involved the escape from nonverbal threat which was constantly on their heels.  The only reference to things being good, to nonverbal safety, were  flash backs. All sorts of machismo and sexual innuendos were used to create the impression that there was some sense of community, belonging and comradery.  

This author estimates that the proportion of escape, approach and avoidance behaviors in this movie was 55: 35: 5. Most scenes were graphic portrayals of escape behavior. This author calls it escape from the nonverbal, because the constant violence elicits and emphasizes respondent and not operant behavior.  The only scene in which there was some operant behavior was the one in which the father, who was brutally murdered, was trying to teach his son right from wrong. The approach behaviors involved women, robbing a bank, attempts to reach this friend’s house and trying to save the son. As unfortunately is very often the case, many approach behaviors led to even more escape behaviors. When our approach behaviors don’t represent the potential fulfillment of our real needs, chasing phony needs takes precedent over the pursuit of our real needs. 

Obviously, the pursuit of false needs, such as the robbery of the bank, which supposedly would make them wealthy, inevitably led to the increase in escape behavior. The only thing which could have set the stage for security, stability and well-being was the verbal teaching of right and wrong. In this movie it was pointed out very well that this would have led to avoidance of much trouble. It has not yet been properly looked into how important avoidance behaviors are. To become truly verbal behavior and to learn Sound Verbal Behavior (SVB), there must be more of an emphasis on avoidance behavior.  Of course, SVB is based on the avoidance of Noxious Verbal Behavior (NVB).

In America there is an emphasis on approach behaviors. Presumably, we can have whatever we want and we can have all our needs met. However, what we pursue is often not what we want. Only when fulfilling what we consider to be our need doesn’t make us happy or doesn't enhance our relationship, do we realize that we must perhaps avoid things rather than approach. Nothing teaches us to avoid things like our relationships do. The opposite is just as true: with the lack of relationship, we see a decrease in our ability to avoid things. Relationships keep us safe because they more reliably protect us against anything which threatens our existence. Because of our relationships we are willing to avoid and able to avoid. Without relationship we can’t avoid anything and we are basically constantly at the mercy of the threatening circumstances which surround us (like in the movie!).

In this movie it is clear that nothing can be avoided by the main characters. All they are able to do is to frantically approach what they believe will fulfill their need. Due to escape behavior they make it out alive. However, with an accurate teaching of right and wrong there would have been no need to escape, because the wrong would have been avoided. Yet, this could only happen if there had been accurate teaching of right and wrong. A lot of escape behavior, as depicted in this movie, is totally ineffective. We may escape one thing, but are again threatened by another. They escaped from the police, but gang members took the son hostage. 

Escape behavior is only effective to the extent that our avoidance behavior and our approach behavior is effective. To the extent that this is not the case, as is often the case, escape behavior is increased instead of decreased. The more escape behaviors dominate our behavioral repertoire the lesser chances we have to accurately assess what we should approach and what we should avoid. Our tendency to approach things at all cost, costs us dearly and we pay a big price for our addictions to what we presumably want. The monstrosity of what we want and approach again and again, is such that in the end it can’t be escaped. 

No matter how much we want to escape from what we ourselves have approached, it is not in the nature of things that this is possible. Since we are the ones who have approached it, escaping is not the way to go. Stopping our approach is much more effective than escaping what we keep approaching. Stopping our approach involves learning how to avoid. This is the teaching of right and wrong which this father was trying to teach to his son. As it happens in the movie, also in real life we give short shrift to our need to teach this. Supposedly, this child has understood, even while his father was slaughtered. Much more teaching is needed than that. Much less emphasis must be made on escape behaviors, which dominates this movie, which is our life. How do we avoid having to escape? How do we fulfil our real needs? 

Sound Verbal Behavior (SVB) not only answers these questions, it asks them. We cannot answer questions which were never asked. SVB makes us wonder if we are happy and if others are happy. Our conversation about what reinforces us is the essence of SVB. Only this can make clear to us what we want to approach and what we want to avoid. Once we engage in SVB, it becomes self-evident that we need to avoid much, much more than that we need to approach. In fact, our avoidance behavior dictates what we can approach. Due to SVB, we approach less, avoid more, and consequently, keep our need to escape to a minimum. In Noxious Verbal Behavior (NVB) we keep escaping, but we are never really safe.