May 10, 2014

May 10, 2014

Written by Maximus Peperkamp, M.S. Verbal Behaviorist

Dear Reader, 

 

It is astounding so few intellectuals are willing to talk. The vast majority only wants to be right and makes sure beforehand that their point of view is going to be supported. Conversation which is based on such predetermined goals can’t go anywhere. However, this reflects the problem of all interaction. As long as it is predetermined, we will continue to remain stuck.

The question we must ask ourselves is: do we really want to have more of the same conversation? If we do, we can go on as usual, but if we are serious about changing how we talk and what we talk about, we must make attempts to stop ourselves from doing what we are always doing, even if such attempts are not immediately effective. 

Our ability to stop ourselves is limited, to say the least. We go on because we can get away with our way of dominating. We don’t realize that we are missing out big time on what is only possible if we learn to control ourselves. We don’t like the idea of having to learn and practice self-control and our ability to make others control themselves is our favorite way of dealing with our own inability. 

Those who only want others to control themselves are often incapable of controlling themselves, while those who are in control of themselves are not interesting in controlling others. They model to others their ability to control themselves. Nothing else is needed. It is not that others are told to control themselves that they will be able to control themselves. We are only able to control ourselves when someone is demonstrating to us what self-control looks and sounds like. 

Our lack of self-control derives from the lack of self-control of those who were teaching us. Sadly, for the most part, those who taught us self-control didn’t have it themselves. Furthermore, those who are attracted to teaching self-control to others are often attracted to it because they falsely believe that they will learn self-control by teaching it to others. This is wrong, because nobody who teaches self-control to others learns to control himself in this process. 

The person who wants to learn self-control has to be busy with him or herself. This is a challenge because who is controlling who? The first step in gaining self-control, is the need to acknowledge that there is no self to control. Once this has been done, one can understand why under certain circumstances there is no self-control and why under other circumstances is self-control. There is always more self-control in circumstances of bi-directional communication and there is always less self-control in circumstances of uni-directional communication. 

In Sound Verbal Behavior (SVB) people co-regulate each other by the way in which they communicate, but in Noxious Verbal Behavior (NVB), they dis-regulate each other. In the former, we talk with each other, in the latter, we talk at each other. In the former, we take turns, but in the latter we force others to behave in a particular way. When self-control replaces bi-directional communication, we will engage in NVB, but when co-regulation replaces uni-directional, hierarchical communication, we achieve SVB. This model is useful because it indicates the distinction between two categories of spoken communication. This distinction makes clear that we only communicate during SVB and not during NVB. In NVB we are too busy with controlling ourselves and each other, but during SVB we are neither trying to control ourselves nor each other.