August 16, 2016

August 16, 2016

Written by Maximus Peperkamp, M.S. Verbal Engineer

Dear Reader,

This is my eighteenth response to the paper “Radical Behaviorism in Reconciliation with Phenomenology” by Willard Day (1969). Day writes “the verbal community has taught us a variety of practices by which we guess at relevant factors, some more useful than others.” 

Only to the extent that our verbal community has taught us Sound Verbal Behavior (SVB) will it cultivate the practices with which we can predict rather than guess at the “relevant factors” (as we do today).

The natural world is only relevant for those who can engage in SVB, but it is absolutely irrelevant to those who only know how to have Noxious Verbal Behavior (NVB). To the extent that we were conditioned by NVB, we will inevitably continue to enforce our views onto the reality.

Our justification for the outcomes of NVB, the presumed usefulness of coercive behavioral control, predicts more problems in the future. . Once we know about the SVB/NVB distinction, we realize that our verbal community has taught us a great deal of complete nonsense. 

It is not that some practices are “more useful than others”, but rather that some practices are useful, while others are utterly useless. NVB is useless as it will forever keep us guessing “at relevant factors.” 

With NVB we are incapable of describing, addressing and solving our problems. We can only know about the natural world to the extent that our verbal community taught us the practices that make that possible.

Our way of talking either brings us in touch with the natural world of which it is a function or it prevents us from being in touch with the natural world. SVB is scientific, but NVB is unscientific interaction. We can no longer afford “a variety of practices,” we need to teach SVB. 

I am not guessing at “relevant factors” as I know exactly what I am doing. I had to rearrange my schedule for my therapy clients as the Fall Semester at college is about to start. I treated eight individuals in one day! How is it even possible that I can successfully give therapy to eight different people and still not feel tired? Actually, I feel great, because I know each client was helped by what I have taught them. 

I waste no time talking about anything else and I teach each one of my clients about the distinction between Sound Verbal Behavior (SVB) and Noxious Verbal Behavior (NVB). 

One client, who dissociated from her emotions, writes about each of her sessions. She told me I challenge her thinking. As she enjoys this, she realizes she is capable of deeper thoughts than she was having before. Moreover, she is surprised that after each session her thinking is clear. She has moments in which she opens up and then she retreats again and we discuss the changes which occur when she switches from one to another. 

When she opens up, my body relaxes and when she distances herself, my body tenses up. She disconnects from her body while she speaks, but slowly, step by step, she is beginning to embody her communication during her interactions with me. Each session she is becoming more and more talkative and genuine. It is as if she is coming alive. Although she often tries to contradict what I am saying, our conversation brings her attention to how she experiences her own sound while she speaks. 

I am not trying to change what she is saying or how she sounds, but I let her know when she sounds a little better and she agrees with me. As we explore why she also feels a little better, she produces more SVB and decreases her NVB. As these subtle changes are accurately described and verified, she notices her belief about herself is disproved and she is more relaxed. Although I only refer to the SVB/NVB distinction, she say that each session is very different as my interventions activate the speaker-as-own-listener.