July 18, 2015

July 18, 2015

Written by Maximus Peperkamp, M.S. Verbal Engineer

Dear Reader, 

 

This is the eleventh writing which includes findings that were reported by the animal researchers Owren and Rendall in their paper “An affect conditioning model of nonhuman primate vocal signaling” (1997).

Now that I have entered my writings of the missing days, I am ready to write about the paper. I am happy to be on track again. I surprised myself by accomplishing this with one-page entries, which came out pretty good. It also felt good to keep the title of this paper listed as  my writing remained under discriminative control of what I was reading in that paper. 

“The most basic proposal of our model is that individual primates use vocalizations to produce affective responses in conspecific receivers, thereby influencing subsequent behavior of those animals.” 

Apparently, I have been proposing this affect induction model ever since I discovered Sound Verbal Behavior (SVB) and Noxious Verbal Behavior (NVB), two universal subclasses of vocal verbal behavior, which dovetails with and are explained by this research on primates.

As the “sorts of learning involved in habituation and Pavlovian conditioning are ubiquitous among animals and occur even in the simplest nervous systems, these principles appear to provide a promising starting point.” 

Hitler’s voice was not experienced as an aversive stimulus by the millions of people who saluted him with “Heil Hitler.” However, those who were occupied by the Nazis, they didn't feel his voice as inspiring and energizing.

July 17, 2015

July 17, 2015

Written by Maximus Peperkamp, M.S. Verbal Engineer

Dear Reader,

 

This is the tenth writing which includes findings that were reported by the animal researchers Owren and Rendall in their paper “An affect conditioning model of nonhuman primate vocal signaling” (1997).

This paper has made me think of influencing effects of Sound Verbal Behavior (SVB) and Noxious Verbal Behavior (NVB). In SVB and in NVB the speaker speaks with an entirely different voice. 

In NVB the speaker speaks with Voice I, but in SVB the speaker speaks with Voice II. These two voices have diametrically opposing effects. With Voice I we frighten and intimidate others, but with Voice II we comfort and attract each other. 

We often don’t realize that we speak with Voice I and although we are unaware of the SVB/NVB distinction, we still like to think that we speak with Voice II, while in reality we speak with Voice I. 

When people are confronted with the fact that they produce NVB, they feel embarrassed. The reason they feel embarrassed is because they were unaware of how they sounded, they were not listening to themselves. 

While we speak it is easy to get stuck in predetermined behavior. NVB is the kind of talk in which nothing new is said. SVB, on the other hand, is made possible by the properly expressed sensitivity of the speaker. 

The SVB speaker never overwhelms the listener. If a speaker is him or herself not at ease with his or her own thought and emotions, he or she is bound to overwhelm the listener. Rather than experiencing his or her own emotions, such a speaker makes others experience his or her emotions. 

If a speaker is frustrated, confused, distracted, overwhelmed or stressed, he or she will elicit these emotions in others. In SVB, by contrast, the speaker is in touch with and in control of his or her own feelings and thoughts. 

The SVB speaker induces the same well-being in the listener as he or she is experiencing. In NVB, speakers use Voice I to externalize their feelings and thoughts. The NVB speaker controls the listener with negative sounds.

July 16, 2015

July 16, 2015

Written by Maximus Peperkamp, M.S. Verbal Engineer

Dear Reader, 

 

This is the ninth writing which includes findings that were reported by the animal researchers Owren and Rendall in their paper “An affect conditioning model of nonhuman primate vocal signaling” (1997).

During private speech no sound is produced or heard. Sound is only produced and heard during public speech. It is ridiculous that schizophrenia has given status to hearing voices. Nobody can hear voices when no sound is made. 

When we wake up from a dream we know it was not real, but supposedly the schizophrenic day dream is something different. Psychosis is as unreal as a dream. Psychosis is private speech, which is, of course, a function of the kind of public speech I call Noxious Verbal Behavior (NVB), chaotic,  confusing, inconsistent and frightening public speech. 

The only solution to psychosis is Sound Verbal Behavior (SVB) public speech, which that replaces NVB private speech with SVB private speech. Nothing needs to be done with the NVB private speech or psychosis. 

The fact that almost everybody has been trying to do something about NVB private speech has not helped anyone. It has not and could not increase SVB and it has not and could not decrease NVB. 

NVB can only be decreased by increasing SVB. Only those who know how to have SVB can influence and regulate the psychotic, bipolar or depressed person. Any concept of therapy that is based on content of speech misses out on the important onditioning effects of the sound of our voice. 

Due to the conditioning effects of our voice we regulate or dysregulate our selves and each other. The schizophrenic, bipolar or depressed produce him or herself a dysregulating sound.   

It is this sound needs to be changed and once that is accomplished the person is no longer schizophrenic, bipolar or depressed. We can only change one sound with another sound, but in NVB we get carried away by words.

July 15, 2015

July 15, 2015

Written by Maximus Peperkamp, M.S. Verbal Engineer

 

Dear Reader, 

 

This is the eight writing which includes findings that were reported by the animal researchers Owren and Rendall in their paper “An affect conditioning model of nonhuman primate vocal signaling” (1997).

My latest entries are very satisfying to me because I seem to be able to leap over the days with giant steps. I know it sounds a little exaggerated, but it is sort of miracle to me that can do this. I have covered already more than half the distance and I am still only three days behind. 

I love to play with language like this. What else is falling behind, getting off track and catching than a bunch of words produced by my private speech? The imaginary audience, who reads this and makes writing a worthwhile activity, is my own reading, which happens mostly after I have written. 

First I write and then I read. There doesn’t seem to be such a thing as in speaking, that one can listen while one speaks. It doesn’t seem to be the case that I am reading while I am writing. I think that this is one of the many illusions which are created by printed language. 

The idea that the writer reads while he or she writes is based on the fact that one's private speech is calming down. Writing then is a method for calming down one’s private speech in the absence of others. 

It seems to be true that even the illusion of such a benefit is meaningful to the readers who want to read it. I wonder how much calming down is really good for us? Frankly, I think much so-called calmed down speech is toxic. 

There is a difference between being calm and trying to calm down. While trying to calm down we create the illusion of being calm, but in reality we are seldom calm. We stop trying to calm down when we are really calm. Thus, in SVB, we are not trying to calm down, but we are calm, whereas in NVB we pretend to be be calming down, but we are never really calm.

July 14, 2015

July 14, 2015

Written by Maximus Peperkamp, M.S. Verbal Engineer

Dear Reader, 

 

This is the seventh writing which includes findings that were reported by the animal researchers Owren and Rendall in their paper “An affect conditioning model of nonhuman primate vocal signaling” (1997).

It is amazing what ‘falling behind’ and ‘catching up’ can reveal. I will write about these papers later. Without ‘falling behind’ and without organizing a way to get ‘back on track’again certain discoveries could never be made. 

There is a need to ‘fall behind’ so that one can ‘catch up’ and this need is especially apparent in our vocal verbal behavior. In yesterday’s writing I still had the need to mention that my writing was only going to be one page long, but today I don ‘t have that urge anymore. 

Due to my catching-up-actions my language dissolves. Yesterday morning, as I was meditating near the creek, there was only the sound of the water and the birds and I had this one thought how important it is to be quiet. 

Inasmuch as we need to talk, we also need to be able to be quiet. Also, we need a way of talking which makes us quiet. Noxious Verbal Behavior (NVB), in which the speaker influences the behavior of the listener in a negative way, cannot accomplish this, but Sound Verbal Behavior (SVB), in which the speaker affects the listener with an affiliative, appetitive and positive contingency, creates and instills peacefulness. 

To discover and establish SVB, we must identify and prevent NVB. While we speak with one another, we must acknowledge that we ‘fall behind’ and ‘get off the track.’We engage in NVB and when we acknowledge that, we  ‘catch up’ and we regain and maintain SVB. 

There is no other way 'to catch up' then by talking. Although this process can be described in writing and many writings have been about this, such writings could never result into us getting ‘back on track’ and ‘catching up’ with our speaking. For that to happen, we must stop ourselves and each other each time when we have NVB.