May 31, 2016

May 31, 2016

Written by Maximus Peperkamp, M.S. Verbal Engineer

Dear Reader,

In Verbal Behavior (1957) B.F. Skinner proposed the transition from a pre-scientific verbal community to a scientific verbal community. This transition, however, required far more than merely a change in terminology as it will only succeed with a new way of talking. 

As you explore with me the Sound Verbal Behavior (SVB)/ Noxious Verbal Behavior (NVB) distinction, you will agree that the change from NVB to SVB is necessary to become scientific. Moreover, you will acknowledge that you were not and could not be scientific as long as you remained involved with NVB. 

Without the SVB/NVB distinction it was impossible for scientists to understand what was preventing them from being scientific about their way of talking. Skinner created a new behaviorist verbal community with his operant terminology, but to implement this terminology a new way of talking was needed. 

If Skinner had known about the SVB/NVB distinction, he surely would have agreed with it and he would have talked about it. I don’t disagree with his terminology, but I think that emphasis on what we say is a stand in the way for becoming aware about how we say things. 

“One of the ultimate accomplishments of a science of verbal behavior may be an empirical logic, or a descriptive and analytic scientific epistemology, the terms and practices of which will be adapted to human behavior as a subject matter” (1957, p. 431). 

SVB is absolutely needed to adapt Skinner’s terms and practices to vocal verbal behavior as a subject matter. The continuation of NVB has impaired the dissemination of operant science. In human behavior, spoken, not written communication needs our attention. The effects of our talking on other behaviors are underestimated!