June 21, 2016

June 21, 2016 

Written by Maximus Peperkamp, M.S. Behavioral Engineer

Dear Reader, 

This is my seventh response to “Epistemological Barriers to Radical Behaviorism” by Donohue et al. (1998). Although these authors do a good job pointing out “concepts have limitations in that they selectively focus attention and contain presuppositions regarding what is plausible or even possible”, they don’t take this line of thought far enough.

Every time the communicators become fixated on what they say, they lose touch with themselves and others. In Noxious Verbal Behavior (NVB), speakers are oblivious and inconsiderate of how they nonverbally dominate the listener. The fact they remain ignorant about this and can get away with it doesn’t mean that it isn’t happening.

In NVB listeners are not allowed to question speakers. Interestingly, Bachelard defined epistemological barriers or obstacles in the following way: "Any knowledge that is not questioned or that does not lead to further questions, any notion that blocks the fundamental questioning activity of science, is an epistemological obstacle."

During conversation, questions usually come from those who listen to the speaker, who, by asking, then become a speaker. If the listeners cannot become speakers, this “blocks the fundamental questioning activity of science” and this then is “an epistemological obstacle.” If listeners cannot become speakers they will have to get stuck with their private speech. 

“These obstacles or barriers are not external to the scientist, but are held by the scientist in his or her web of belief (Jones, 1991).” Bachelard urges scientists to question and examine their suppositions, otherwise they come to their subject matter “thoroughly prejudiced” and “marked by preconceived ideas and values (Jones, 1999, p. 79). Take note here NVB is always repetitive, mechanical, unconscious, forceful and effortful talk,  while SVB is novel, creative, lively, enjoyable and conscious communication.