June 29, 2014

June 29, 2014

Written by Maximus Peperkamp, M.S. Verbal Behaviorist

Dear Reader, 

When this writer has Sound Verbal Behavior (SVB) by himself, he speaks out loud and listens to himself, while he speaks. When he has SVB with others, others do exactly the same: they listen to themselves, while they speak together with this writer.  During SVB, all the speakers listen to themselves, while they speak.  They do this because they enjoy how they sound. They enjoy how they sound, because they enjoy of how they feel. They feel very good within their own skin, because of how they sound. Their sound is the proof to them that they feel safe, supported, happy and trusting with each other. They know, they wouldn’t and couldn’t sound this way if they felt threatened, neglected, rejected, sad and suspicious.  These negative emotional experiences produce a different kind of sound. Moreover, in Noxious Verbal Behavior (NVB), they would have very different proprioceptive experiences; their bodies would feel uncomfortable.  It is always in hindsight one knows one was having NVB; by the time one knows that one was having NVB, one is already having SVB again, because the sound of one’s voice has changed. 

In SVB these are the things that happen with the speaker.  The speaker speaks and listens to him or herself. Simultaneously, the speaker experiences his or her own sound with his or her body. This physiological experience makes the speaker an embodied speaker. His or her sound is produced by the instrument of sound: his or her body. Our sound depends on the shape and the condition of our body. Under different circumstances we sound differently, because we feel differently. If we listen to how we sound, we tap into how we feel. 

In NVB we don’t listen to the sound of our negative emotions. By experimentation we can find that self-listening, which makes other-listening possible, does not occur in NVB. In NVB, our other-listening excludes our self-listening.  In NVB other-listening prevents self-listening and this in turn prevents other-listening. In NVB we listen differently to others then when we listen to ourselves.  Yet, in NVB, we neither listen to ourselves nor to each other. 

The listener who experiences SVB is able to hear and understand what the speaker says without any effort. Effortlessness is the main characteristic of SVB, whereas NVB involves effort, forcefulness and a loss of energy. Listening to someone’s SVB is energizing, because we are listening to positive emotions which stimulate and resonate with our own positive emotions. Listening to NVB, we tap into our negative emotions. Since the listener’s public speech is positively impacted in SVB, since the relationship between the listener and the speaker in SVB is authentic, equal and ongoing, the willingness to listen in SVB is voluntary. In NVB, by contrast, listening is coerced, because there is inequality between the speaker and the listener. In NVB, the listener is lower, not as important or less powerful than the speaker. Because SVB public speech is reinforcing, the listener doesn’t experience any negative private speech which distracts from what the speaker is saying.  Such distractions occur only during NVB.  

The listener in NVB pretends to listen to the speaker and does what he or she is told, not because he or she wants to, but because he or she feels that he or she has to, because he or she is forced by the speaker. The listener in NVB is constantly made afraid for the consequences of not listening to the speaker. Thus, we are NOT listening in most of our communication, we are incapable of listening in most of our communication, which is NVB, because we are afraid of punitive consequences. This fear of listening is an important topic about which I shall later write more.

It seems to me that we are more afraid of what we fear we might lose than of what we can loose. In other words, much of our fear is imaginary.  We fear rejection, loss of relationship and opportunity, but unless we achieve SVB, we don’t realize that NVB will continue to exploit us for something it can't even deliver. NVB keeps us on our tows, but it never results in happy and healthy relationship, because it forces us to do things; the speaker coerces the listener.  Although most of us think that this is just an inevitable fact of life, we keep missing out on SVB, because we imitate how others speak. On the whole, the listener in NVB doesn’t get to speak that much, but if he or she does, he or she is bound to do so in a NVB fashion, that is, he or she will also make others listen to him or her. In NVB, listeners even make themselves listen, and they even force themselves to speak.

June 28, 2014

June 28, 2014

Written by Maximus Peperkamp, M.S. Verbal Behaviorist

Dear Reader, 

It is quite surprising to this writer how much he enjoys writing. Writing is his new way of speaking. When he starts, he wonders what he will be writing about and something interesting always presents itself. He finds it relaxing and he considers writing as quality time with himself. Right now is three ‘o clock in the morning. The night is cool and quiet. Far away he heard a train and the birds are singing. 

In a little while, he will go back to bed, but for now he speaks with himself with these words. It is a sense of control and peace which is found this way and he wants to hear what he has to say. He doesn’t have to say it, but he can, if he wants to say it. He can determine what he wants to say, in his own way. 

Yesterday, he walked with his wife through the neighborhood. It was a nice walk and people said “good evening” in a friendly manner. He spoke with his wife about his recent emotional outburst when he opened this box with pictures of his family. He was thinking of contacting his family again, because he felt bad again about keeping his family out of his life, but his wife discouraged him. When they were talking, it was a relief to let them go once more and to be able to think that it is okay the way it is and that he doesn’t need to contact them again. 

It is still a new experience for this writer that he is now free from his past with his family. To write this sentence is liberating to him. To speak about himself in the third-person is also helping him to take distance from the things he was for so long so involved in, so attached to and so troubled by. 

There is more calm in his life these days. He is also free from other problems he used have and he is slowly getting used to not having many problems or not even having any problems at all. It is strange for him not to have any problems. He has a t-shirt that says “life is good”. He had a good first week at his new job. He had a training together with his colleagues and he is learning new behaviors.

This writer has learned and is still in the process of learning not to do or say things which before he felt he had to do or say. It is not really a new behavior because it deals with not doing and not saying. As he is doing and saying less and less, life keeps getting better and better. It is really amazing how much gets accomplished in an effective manner by doing and saying as little as possible. 

Even in his writing he practices the minimalism he enjoys. It is an art to say as much as possible with as few words as possible. This writer has always been rather lengthy, but has decided that he wants to be briefer. His success in accomplishing this is more satisfying than how he conducted himself before. 

At this point, Sound Verbal Behavior (SVB) involves an exploration of writing. Writing happens because there is something to write, because something makes us write. Writing is a function of saying something. Although writing is not the same as speaking, although the contingencies that make us write are different than the contingencies that make us speak, they are two different categories of verbal behavior. Likewise, also SVB and Noxious Verbal Behavior (NVB) are two different categories of verbal behavior. When we say something in an angry or hostile manner, this is called NVB, because our nonverbal behavior is based on negative emotions. The word ‘Noxious’ is used to describe the nonverbal effects on listeners. In NVB, a speaker's nonverbal expressions are experienced by the listener as aversive stimuli.  In SVB, however, we only express positive emotions. Although we are verbal in SVB and NVB, we can only be truly verbal SVB. We communicate only in SVB. No matter how verbal we are in NVB, we don't communicate.

Being verbal doesn’t mean that we communicate. We only communicate when it is possible for us to communicate. Negative emotions, such as fear, anger, distrust, irritation, anxiety and sadness make communication impossible. We think they are part of communication, but they are not. They prevent communication and have to be absent for it to start. Because we are so used to and conditioned by NVB, we never explored what SVB is like. SVB is based on the absence of negative stimuli.

June 27, 2014

June 27, 2014

Written by Maximus Peperkamp, M.S. Verbal Behaviorist

Dear Reader, 

 

It happens again and again that this writer hears what other people have been going through is exactly the same as what he went through. This uniformity should be expected from the science called Sound Verbal Behavior (SVB). 

A person is believed to have achieved literacy when he or she has mastered four different behaviors, which are learned separately: listening, speaking, reading and writing. Listening and speaking must be joined for this person to become fully verbal. What this means is that listening and speaking happen at the same rate and intensity level, rather than that they occur separately, on different occasions. In SVB, speakers listen while they speak. Also, reading and writing are ideally joined; the writer reads his or her writing while he or she is writing, rather than reading after he or she has written or before he or she has started writing. 

The notion that something entirely new can be said, when a speaker listens to him or herself, while he or she speaks, originates in a stimulus control which was not operating when we didn’t listen to ourselves while we speak. Therefore, what we say is a function of how we sound. Novelty of public speech is a function of listening while we speak. Listening occurring privately, before or after we have spoken, leads to communication problems in both our public and private speech. 

In SVB public speech, because the speaker listens to him or herself while he or she speaks, he or she experiences SVB private speech, which only occurs during SVB public speech. Since SVB private speech is a continuation of the positive emotions expressed during SVB public speech, we are happy with ourselves and each other during SVB. However, this happiness doesn’t necessarily result in positive private speech, it may also results in the total absence of private speech, in silence. After SVB public speech has occurred, there may be an absence of private speech. After the accurate expression of our thoughts and feelings in SVB we become quiet. 

In Noxious Verbal Behavior (NVB), in which the speaker listens to himself before or after he or she has spoken and not while he or she is speaking, public speech sets the stage for negative private speech.  Moreover, public speech is no longer a function of his or her environment, but it is a function of what this person is saying to him or herself privately. Although the negative emotions of NVB private speech were learned or conditioned in a negative NVB public speech environment, the NVB speaker’s public speech is now determined by his or her NVB private speech.  Stated differently, the NVB speaker is out of touch with his or her environment.

In SVB, by contrast, public speech is always function of the environment or, more accurately, of other people. During NVB, a person’s negative private speech doesn't  abate and therefore keeps setting the stage for NVB public speech. In NVB we can neither have peace with each nor can we have peace with ourselves.  The idea that we should try to change ourselves is the same as the idea that we should try to change others. However, we only keep thinking that we need to change ourselves or each other as long as we don’t view SVB as well as NVB as behaviors which are a function of our environment. There is no inner agent who causes our behavior!

We never individually produce English, Dutch, or Chinese, but we are part of a verbal community. Likewise, SVB and NVB are not behaviors we individually chose, but something we always do together. 

This writer, who in this writing experiences and enjoys the joining of his writing with his reading, realizes that most of what has been written is the product of NVB. NVB reflects the incessant negative private speech of authors, who wanted to be speakers, who wanted to be listened to and understood, who longed for SVB, but who didn’t know how to have it. Like everyone else, this writer, based on his being conditioned by NVB, was also once convinced that expressing his negative private speech into public was the most important thing to do. He did this in an attempt to rid himself of his negative emotions, but it never worked.

In SVB there is nothing to get rid of. The absence of aversive stimulation creates an environment in which we can communicate like we have never done before.  The only thing that works is the environment in which SVB is possible. 

When we don’t have any back problems, we don’t feel our back, but when we sprain a muscle, we feel our back all the time. In good health, we aren't even aware that our back is fine. Similarly, our private speech is only about things that we need to watch out for and be careful about. Said differently, private speech is basically always negative. It warns us for the negative stimuli outside of our skin, in our environment, which we need to avoid. Why would we want to have back problems? We must be careful when lifting things and be mindful about how much we can carry. If we try to lift too much weight, we will ruin our backs. NVB weighs us down, because of our over-involvement with the negative stimuli in our environment. Oddly, in NVB, we approach instead of avoid such stimuli. Indeed, in NVB, we are getting on each other’s back. Due to NVB people seem to have lost their backbone.  In NVB, we try to carry the weight of the world or we throw our weight around.

In SVB, by contrast, we have each other’s back. In SVB, we back up and we find that our verbal expressions are always embedded in our nonverbal experiences. In SVB, we back out of meaningless, NVB argumentation. In SVB we come back to our senses, because we embody our language. Coming back to our senses means we perceive safe environments as safe, we avoid and know how to avoid unsafe environments. In SVB, we get back to how we as individual organisms experience our environment. In SVB, by following the sound of our own voice, we follow the way back to our own well-being. In SVB, we become aware of circumstances that once existed, way back, in which we were happy and content. 

After SVB, there is nothing to hang on to anymore, not even our positive self-talk. After SVB, conflicts about who we believe to be completely dissolve, because SVB makes us one and allows us to experience unity while we speak. We go through many similar experiences and these experiences are expressed appropriately. SVB doesn’t lead to positive self-talk, but to absence of self-talk, because there is no self.  This however doesn’t mean that we are unconscious. To the contrary, due to SVB we are conscious and due to NVB we are unconscious and mechanical.

June 26, 2014

June 26, 2014

Written by Maximus Peperkamp, M.S. Verbal Behaviorist

Dear Reader, 

 

Yesterday night this writer opened a box to look for some pictures to decorate his office. In the box was a photo album with pictures of his parents. It hit him like a ton of bricks and he broke out in tears. Seeing them and thinking about how far removed he feels, triggered an emotional outburst. 

Early this morning this writer woke up from a nightmare. He was walking in a war-ravished area with only collapsed buildings. He was holding a naked baby boy in his arms and he did not know what to do with him. Although the baby was calm, he felt very worried about it and he didn't know how to protect it. There was no good place to lay it down anywhere, so he carefully held it in his arms, because all around was nothing but dirt and chaos. 

The discriminative stimuli for this dream were probably these pictures of his parents. An instantaneous response was the deeply felt sadness about not being with them. The dream was also likely a consequence of what happened yesterday night. About a week ago, this writer reread a dreadful poem that had been written by his father. In the poem he described an event that had shaped his life. During the final year of the Second World War he and his one year younger brother had been send away to an aunt in the north of Holland, because there was nothing anymore to eat for them. He traveled on a train which was full of German soldiers and reached his aunt and survived the war in this way. It had been a terrifying experience for him about which he would have nightmares for the rest of his life. 

This writer was never able to connect with his edgy father, who is still alive. Since he wanted to connect with him so badly, but couldn’t, he decided not to contact his father anymore. Ever since he has decided that, his life has been much better and without the emotional turmoil, which was there as long as he was still trying to keep in touch with his parents. His father has impacted him in complicated ways, because he used to say: whatever it is we can always talk about it! Only now he knows that his father was unable to have SVB with him.

June 25, 2014

June 25, 2014

Written by Maximus Peperkamp, M.S. Verbal Behaviorist

Dear Reader, 

 

A few papers were read about the wonderful possibilities of creating a better world with behaviorism. That is what this author is into. However, attention for contingencies that maintain behavior outside of the skin, although necessary, is not feasible and has historically not been possible. Such attention always coincides with higher levels of cooperation, wellbeing, community and togetherness. For as long as that is not a reality, it is both safer and more effective to focus on what happens beneath the skin. That is this author’s focus, which has led to his success.

The behaviorist papers about creating a better society were written thirty six years ago and nothing has changed for the better. Nothing has changed regarding the public’s view of the causation of human behavior. We still believe and we treat each other and ourselves as if we cause our own behavior. This pre-scientific notion is extremely tenacious and harmful. 

Yesterday, this author heard on the radio a report about the Amish community in which there is a measles epidemic. The Amish, until recently, refused vaccinations. Because of how their community has been affected, they are now finally more often willing to take the vaccinations. 

This is one of many examples of the tediously slow pace of ‘progress.’ It becomes increasingly more evident that human beings are destroying their environment, yet, we are not even recognizing that we are each other’s environment. This author is convinced that we don’t care about our environment, because we don’t realize that we are each other’s environment. Unless we realize, during spoken communication, that we are each other’s environment, we are unable of creating and maintaining healthy relationships. Without the skills to have positive, supportive and peaceful relationships, we are on the path of destroying our world. This author is dedicated to teaching where teaching is possible, learning where learning is possible, communicating where communication is possible. 

Nowhere does it become more clear that we don’t cause our own behavior, that we can’t cause our own behavior, that we have never caused our own behavior, but, that we cause each other’s behavior, than in our spoken communication. I ask you: how much sense would it make to speak English to a person who only speaks Russian? It wouldn’t. Either the Russian must learn English or the English must learn Russian, but in either case, a speaker only makes sense as mediated by a listener. If the listener doesn’t matter, as in the case of NVB, the speaker speaks a language which is and remains foreign to the listener. The listener can, of course, be forced, non-verbally and verbally, into all sorts of things, but the speaker and listener remain strangers, because they don’t speak the same language. If, however, the speaker listens to himself while he or she speaks, the listener is going to be able to learn the language of the speaker. 

The listener, who listens to a speaker, who doesn’t listen to him or herself while he or she speaks, cannot really learn the speaker’s language and can at best pretend to have learned the speaker’s language. No matter how good the listener may get at pretending that he can understand the speaker, the listener is enabling the oppressive speaker, but is not really understanding him or her. It is never the fault of the listener that he or she doesn’t understand the speaker, because the listener, who is functionally the child of the speaker, was conditioned by the circumstances that were created by the speaker. 

If the speaker didn’t listen to him or herself, and, non-verbally forced the listener to listen to him or her, without making sense verbally, then the listener is bound to be listening and responding to the speaker non-verbally. This natural response is because the listener always mediates the speaker. 

If the speaker speaks in a forceful way, then the listener/child will unknowingly adapt to this. He or she will accept as normal whatever he or she was born and raised in. Even when he or she finds out that other people speak in a different way, he or she will not learn this language, as long as he or she can get by or get away with his or her acquired native Noxious Verbal Behavior (NVB).