May 25, 2015

May 25, 2015

Written by Maximus Peperkamp, M.S. Verbal Engineer

Dear Reader, 

I woke up from a dream in which I was going to be incarcerated. It was told by some guard that I was going to be taken to jail. Although I was innocent and could have run away, I didn’t resist my arrest. I was put in a room with windows and could I see what was outside. I looked at the people inside and they didn’t seem threatening. They were friendly and nodded as if they were saying that they knew what I was going through. One person put black tar on me and then I was floating in water and the tar was polluting the water. The door out of glass was locked and I was alone, but I wasn’t afraid or sad. I knew what the tar was. Actually, I woke up while I was thinking about it.

Yesterday, I got two small black jars with ginseng paste from my wife’s sister. She arrived with my mother in law and they will go together with my wife on holiday for a week. We ate together and we sat in the yard. I tried to talk a little, but kept away, because my mother in law doesn’t talk with me. Although she brought a ton of food, she ignores me and is unable to say anything nice to me. There is nothing I can do about it. I drank some beer and only talked a little with my wife’s sister, who was friendly and sat together with me near the fire place in our back yard. I drank beer to honor my father in law, with whom, on occasions like this, I would have had a couple. The dream was about the feelings I experienced in my own house since the arrival of my wife’s mother.

I look forward to spending a week by myself. My wife, her mother and sister are having this family bond of which I am not part. I accept it. I still feel sleepy and want to try if I can sleep some more. I fell back asleep again and slept for a couple more hours. It is nice to wake up early in the morning and fall asleep again. I woke up a couple of times, but heard the singing of birds and fell asleep again. I dreamed some more, but I forgot what these dreams were about. It doesn’t matter. I am ready for them to leave and be by myself. As I walked into my bedroom, my mother in law walked in. 

I was putting on a t-shirt. She shrieked, because she was not expecting me. I said good morning, but she didn’t even say good morning back to me. She ignored me, but in this moment she was almost forced to acknowledge me. I went back to my office, where I folded up the blankets and the sheets. They are loading up the car and I don’t want to get into anyone’s way and I hope that they will be gone soon. I don’t even want to say good bye anymore. I hear them talk and they seem at ease with each other. My wife came to bring me coffee and told me that there are all sort of things for me to eat when they are gone. Food is very important in Chinese culture. 

I had some oat meal and when I said good morning to Marion, my wife’s sister, my mother in law suddenly said good morning to me. What a miracle! They are in good spirits and my wife was giving me instructions about the watering the plants, cleaning the litter box and feeding the cat. It is a cool Monday morning and today it is Memorial Day. My wife and her sister told me that they didn’t sleep very well because they drank the caffeinated tea their mother had made for them yesterday night. I am sitting in the office and keep myself out of the way and wait for them to leave. The chair I sit in belonged to Bonnie’s father and as the only man in the company of these three Chinese women I am aware that I am supposed to act a role of aloofness, strength and ability.

Kayla goes back and forth between the guests in our house and finds their company entertaining. Occasionally she comes back to me and then she walks off again to be with the crowd, particularly with my wife’s mother, who really likes to play with her and tease her a little bit. Marion brought me a sweet warm bun, with pork on it. I understand this bun was her husband, Brian’s favorite. As the time of departure comes closer, everybody is getting busy. 

The ant invasion in our kitchen was apparently caused by the little garbage bag in the sink that attracted them. I was instructed not to put such garbage back in the sink by my wife. I have never done that. It was always my wife who did that, but her mother told her to tell me not to do that anymore. Bonnie’s mother is continuously critiquing everything everyone does. It seems as if nothing Bonnie ever does is appreciated by her. When I showed her the garden, she snapped at me that it costs too much money and I left it with that. I am sure that they will talk about matters like that during their trip. As the time of their departure comes closer, I am feeling better and better.

When they are gone I will go to the bathroom and relief myself. Normally, I do that short right after I have woken up, but today, I wait. This waiting enhances a sense of control in me, which is quite pleasant. I don’t feel I have to go that badly and will feel comfortable once they are gone. While I am typing these words, I hear birds chirping. It is a glorious morning. I slept so good last night. Lying on the carpet in my office felt comfortable for my back, better than lying on my matras. It felt so good I might sleep on the floor like that again tonight. 


Bonnie is resetting the clock, which had to be stopped as it kept Marion out of her sleep. We are habituated to that sound. The clock is like the heartbeat of our house and I will have to pull up the weights to wind up the clock when they are gone. The clock is in the corner of the room, next to my grandmother’s sowing machine. It is our little house shrine. On the wall, we have a collection of ivory tooth brushes that come from old China. It looks colorful and pleasant. 

A pigeon is cooing nearby and they are walking back and forth to load up their vehicle. Kayla, the cat, gets excited by this activity and runs back and forth. A ripping sound of a motor cycle is heard and a dog starts barking. The metal screen door is closed with a bang and my wife and her sister are laughing. Her mother says something and she is also laughing. They are going to have a great time and are almost ready to go. An airplane flies over and the sound disappears in the distance leaving behind the singing birds and the cooing pigeon. I always loved this calming sound of pigeons and it reminds me of  Holland where this sound was often heard in the summer. It reminds me of good times and of going swimming. It is nice to have these memories. 


The singing of the birds has quieted down. The pigeon has stopped cooing, but while I am writing this, it starts cooing again. It feels as if I am talking with my environment while I am writing these words. The coolness of the morning is passing through our house and the windows, the door to the garden and the front door are open. There is not a whiff of wind outside. Pretty soon my own house will no longer feel like a prison to me. I am looking at the Hydrangea in front of my window. It has grown beautifully since I had cut it back and soon it will have beautiful big white flowers. Also our cherry tree is doing well. We love to see our plants grow and I will water Bonnie’s vegetable patch.   

May 24, 2015

May 24, 2015

Written by Maximus Peperkamp, M.S. Verbal Engineer

Dear Reader, 

Sound Verbal Behavior (SVB) is an extremely delicate matter and is easily disturbed or made impossible. This is the reason we keep missing it. If we wish to continue SVB, we must know how to maintain the environment that allows it. As long as we think that we are doing it, we are not creating the environment in which SVB can take place. We are not individually causing or originating it. Even when we are just by ourselves, we cannot decide to have SVB, because SVB will only happen when our notion of deciding our own behavior has been understood as false. There is no inner self that causes us to behave. Only when we have experienced this understanding can SVB happen. 

Whenever people talk, they think that they do the talking. Likewise, whenever people listen, they think that they do the listening. All the problems involved in talking and listening can be traced back to the common belief that individuals cause their own behavior. No matter how widespread this belief may be, this is absolutely wrong. SVB makes us realize this is not anything intellectual or philosophical. It disappears immediately if our thinking about it is inaccurate. 

To go somewhere one has to know the way. When one knows the way one can go there, but it is not a decision, it is possible to go there. One goes there because one is capable. Thus, it can be said that only certain people can have SVB, while others can’t, although nobody causes it or prevents it. It is equally wrong to think that someone causes SVB as to think that someone prevents it.

The fact that some people can recognize SVB doesn’t mean they can produce it. We first recognize it and only then can we produce it. Many of us cannot produce SVB because we have never recognized it. We think that we have recognized it, that we can do it, but in reality we don’t recognize it and what we are doing is not SVB, but Noxious Verbal Behavior (NVB). In NVB, we think that we can do it, we think that we can try to do it, we feel responsible for doing it and we think that way of others as well. We can only recognize SVB to the extent that we have been exposed to it. There is no way for us to recognize it if we are not exposed to it. We may have been exposed to it, but we didn’t notice that we were exposed to it, because nothing made us recognize it as SVB. It may be happening and people may not be able to recognize it. SVB and NVB are happening but we don't discriminate them and so we are stuck with NVB.  

May 23, 2015

May 23, 2015

Written by Maximus Peperkamp, M.S. Verbal Engineer

Dear Readers, 

 

One of my students, who is suffering from depression, wrote in a two-page paper (which had to start with the sentence: “When I listen to the sound of my voice then…. “), that he didn’t like to listen to the sound of his voice, because he was afraid when others hear him they will not be flattered by it. In other words, he is not listening to himself, but he is imagining how others are hearing and judging him. Interestingly, he also mentions, he doesn’t like his own sound, because other people sound smarter than him. He doesn’t talk about what they say, but he refers to how they sound. This person has hardly said anything in class during this semester, but he once explained to me that he is struggling with fear for embarrassment and social rejection. 

Because of this extra credit assignment, he was speaking and listening to himself, even though he told himself that he didn’t like what he heard and as a result doesn’t dare to say much. As a consequence, he discovered and explored that his private speech consisted of Noxious Verbal Behavior (NVB), which is the vocal verbal behavior in which the speaker (in this case himself) controls the behavior of the listener (also himself) with a negative contingency. 

It is important that we learn from this depressed person that he was really not listening to himself, because he had not been speaking. He was only able to listen to himself again after he began to speak, and, most importantly, after he began to speak with himself. While speaking with others would most likely not result in him being able to listen to himself, speaking with himself made him listen to himself, for the first time. As he continues to speak about the fact that he experiences these anxieties, he finds, to his surprise, that at times, he suddenly feels good. Remarkably, he states he has a voice of his own and then discovers and explores Sound Verbal Behavior (SVB), the vocal verbal behavior in which the speaker (he himself) controls the behavior of the listener (also himself) with an appetitive stimulus. Instantaneously, he gains a sense of control and proudly declares he doesn’t need others to speak for him, because he can speak for himself, but only if he wants to. This positive self-talk, which needs to be further increased, is only possible however, because he is no longer busy with how others are hearing him.

Stated differently, he is no longer listening to himself as if he is listening to someone else. He is now listening to himself and recognizes that he is listening to himself, that is, he is conscious that he is listening to himself and that the speaker and the listener are one and the same person and that he is that one person. When he was not listening to himself, as he didn’t speak, he retreated non-verbally into listening, which was based on negative self-talk, which contrasted people who speak, as sounding good, with his own lack of speech, as sounding bad. Moreover, not only did others sound better, because they talked, they were supposedly smarter, which made him feel even dumber. 

Even though in this case the speaker and the listener are initially connecting because of NVB, this immediately switches to SVB. One could say that the way “in” was the same as the way “out,” that is, lack of self-listening created and maintained an imaginary split between the speaker and the listener, which gave rise to a self-defeating belief in an inner self. As self-listening is restored, due to a writing assignment which involves listening to oneself, the muted speaker comes back alive again, is acknowledged and validated. Suddenly, the student realizes it can go both ways, meaning, he seemingly sounds terrible as long as he is not saying anything, but he actually likes his own voice, when he again says something and attentively listens to it.

Once he is having the choice to be with or without a voice, he chooses to have his own voice, regardless of how it sounds. The happiness that he can finally speak out and listen to himself is more important than the fact that he didn’t like his voice. He is so happy to have a voice that he sounds good. Now he appreciates his voice even when it doesn’t sound good. He realizes that he can talk in spite of how he sounds. However, toward the end of his paper, his self-listening is replaced by other-listening. He no longer listens to himself, but worries about how he will be able to continue this with others. His positive experience stood in a stark contrast with his long-held negative way of viewing himself. He would need more reinforcement to be able to continue. Especially, he needs verbal instruction to listen to himself, so he can stop trying to sound like how he imagines others might like him to sound. He dislikes his sound because of instructions that were given. Depression is only one of the many problems of our belief in an inner self. 

Our common belief in a behavior-causing self is deeply problematic. It is because of NVB that this fiction can and will continue. SVB, by contrast, is the only solution. Stated differently, NVB elicits emotional discomfort, which cannot be disssolved by knowledge. As the depressed student described, NVB is against knowledge, as certain circumstances are necessary for knowledge to be obtained. Knowledge of the natural world can only be obtained when our sensory neurons evoke rather than elicit the neural behaviors involved in learning. SVB reinforces positive emotions. NVB reinforces, exploits and perpetuates negative emotions; we are made to feel bad about ourselves and we are doing whatever we can to avoid that. 

 

Although we may not suffer from depression like this student, we all suffer all sorts of other negative consequences from how we talk with each other. As the example makes clear, the most problematic aspect about our common way of talking is of course how this makes us talk with ourselves or rather, how this prevents us from talking with ourselves. Belief in an inner behavior-causing agent is maintained by NVB. Our covert negative private speech is caused and maintained by overt, negative public speech. The idea that, something can be done, therapeutically, about negative covert speech, is a mentalistic notion in which we remain oblivious of the fact that private speech is a function of public speech, which continues unabated as long as we don’t turn our attention to it.

Rather than merely dealing with symptoms, we should attend to the actual causes of our problems. If we were really doing that, we would be no longer interested in our individual problems, but with the way of interacting which has caused these problems in the first place. Whether it is the negative private speech of this student, the suicidality of the bipolar patient, the guardedness of the paranoid schizophrenic, the history of the abusive father or the need of the addicted mother, we would be dealing not with our individual problems, but with how we all communicate. Rather than making it into someone’s personal problem, we would realize that these are all effects of NVB and can only be solved by more SVB. The increase of SVB is not going to depend on only a couple of people. If it is going to increase it is because millions of people are going to recognize how important our way of talking with each other really is.

May 22, 2015

May 22, 2015

Written by Maximus Peperkamp, M.S. Verbal Engineer

Dear Reader, 

Today’s writing is my fifth response to “Behaviorism and the Stages of Scientific Activity” by J. Moore (2010). Although I tried to contact him, Moore has never even responded to me. Yet, he is the one who wrote “Radical behaviorism is concerned about talk of mental causes and dimensions because such talk is a product of nonscientific influences (underlining added).”  

May be it was because I was explaining myself in terms of having ‘meditative interaction’ in my previous writings? However, Moore’s written concern “about talk” is not the same as my involvement with real talk. This reminds me of the colloquial distinction between SVB and NVB. In the former people talk with each other, but in the latter, people talk at each other. Stated differently, SVB is bi-directional and NVB is uni-directional. It amazes me how often behaviorist writing, supposedly in an attempt to prevent “reification”, contain references to things said without giving consideration for the fact that these written “words can neither literally create nor change the nature of the things talked about.”

 

Scholarly emphasis on writing rather than on talking is based on the false assumption that studying what is written will change the way in which we talk. Sadly, Skinner’s project of “redefining psychology” was mainly about writing. He lamented the fact that the science of behavior “inherited a language so infused with metaphor and implication that it was frequently impossible merely to talk about behavior without raising the ghosts of dead systems. Worst of all, it carried on the practice of seeking solution for the problems of behavior elsewhere that in the behavior itself.” Although he argued in favor of a science “in which behavior was taken as a subject matter in its own right, as Watson (1878/1958) had earlier envisioned it”, he didn’t seek, like I do, solutions for how we talk “in the behavior itself.” To the contrary, Skinner himself urged the behaviorist to seek the “solution for the problems elsewhere”, that is, in their writings. Later in his career, Skinner stated “As a philosophy of a science of behavior, behaviorism calls for probably the most drastic change ever in our way of thinking about man (underlining added).” He didn’t say‘talking'!

What are the “methods and instruments needed in the study of behavior?” Are we prevented from advancing more rapidly toward them, as Skinner believed, because of “the diverting preoccupation with a supposed or real inner life?” Is mentalism, as Moore believes, a half-baked “third-stage verbal product”, which hasn’t “gone through developmental verbal processes associated with the first two stages?” We can use our vocal verbal behavior as our method and we must use our eyes and ears as instruments. Our “diverting preoccupation with an inner life” is not kept alive by cognitive science, but by our overemphasis on writing and reading. If we would decide to investigate talking while we talk, there would be no room for an imaginary inner agent. It is because we haven’t talked that this inner agent is still there. Really talking means: being without an inner agent. This is not esoteric, but scientific. Certainly “cognitive psychology is a great hoax and a fraud”, but regardless of that, most interaction is based on belief in the inner causation of behavior, that is, most talking is NVB. 

As a teacher, but also as a facilitator of hundreds of seminars, that is, as an experimenter, I have found that “the validation of the experiment is the change in the behavior of the individual subject, guided by principle or instruction.” My focus has been and continues to be “manipulations necessary to confirm the law.” Although SVB has been confirmed over and over again, I never get tired of it. I am aligned with Bacon, who stated “to know a cause is have the ability to produce an effect.” I happily consider myself “homo faber”, a “making human” rather than “homo sapiens”, a “thinking human.” As evidenced by my students, the SVB/NVB distinction is “practical, productive knowledge – how to control, make and remake the world.” Moreover, I feel at home in the USA because my technological theory is aligned with American culture. I continue a lineage of passionate behavioral engineers, who are into scientifically doing something to change the world into a better place. 

By instructing people to listen to themselves while they speak, I bring them “under control of variables and relations that participate in an event.” By doing so, “participants may better formulate and refine principles that inform the prediction and control of behavioral events.” The event I am talking about here is talking. People learn to discriminate the two subsets of vocal verbal behavior and the conditions in which these behaviors occur.

As with all behaviorisms, SVB is an inductive practice. “The inductive leap from particulars to universals” begins with the speaker’s verbal behavior and then it generalizes to the listener’s response. When it is pointed out to a speaker that he or she sounds a certain way, that is, when the listener becomes the speaker and then tells the other speaker how he or she is experiencing this speaker and how he or she is feeling about him or her, this is often, quite conveniently, pushed aside as “irrelevant or ad hominem.” The difference between SVB and NVB is mostly avoided in actual conversation, because, as Schoenfeld (1969) correctly described  “what is not often pointed out [in deductively arrived postulates] is to say where the axioms or postulates come from in the first place.”  Moreover, “to argue that only the ultimate correctness of the postulates is of interest, is to deny that human behavior is involved.” The difference between SVB and NVB is not theoretical, as it is about a functional relationship that involves the speaker and the listener. Once we explore SVB and NVB, we can no longer hide behind our unscientific, favorite, mentalistic postulates. 

SVB and NVB are “behavioral processes” which “are uniform across time and place.” These subsets of vocal verbal behavior are on the continuum of behavior with other species; there is a nonverbal version of SVB and NVB in nonhumans. Since our phylogenetic development makes our ontogenetic development (SVB and NVB), possible, it is important to recognize the environmental variables which effect how we talk. Development of scientific theory is essentially not very different from our everyday pragmatic efforts to make sense of our world. Our theory of reality is only as good as the extent to which we accurately measure the results of our actions. As we research SVB, it will become apparent that “better outcomes of events”, better results in our conversation, depends not on specific third-stage statements, but on whether SVB was able to continue. The verbal instructions given by the speaker involve appetitive stimulation of the listener, who as a speaker maintains SVB, by reinforcing the other speaker. In conclusion, NVB is my way or the highway, but in SVB everyone can be a speaker, who is reinforced by the fact that he or she is listening to him or herself, but who is also being listened to by others. It is reciprocal reinforcement that makes SVB possible and keeps it going.