November 15, 2014

November 15, 2014

Written by Maximus Peperkamp, M.S. Verbal Behaviorist

Dear Reader, 

 

I was reading in the  newspaper about some "retired professor who doesn't mince words", who goes as far "as to forecast humanity's life expectancy", but, who "lately has refrained from issuing such a bold statements" because his "approach has shifted." Has he studied the science of human behavior, behaviorology? No, but, in need of attention, as a retired professor, he finds it more reinforcing to  "focus on the emotional and psychological response we [he] might have." Is he talking about the actual causes of why we behave the way we do? May be, a little…"Other scientist", who are not like him retired (and not free to say whatever they want), who "have been unwilling to state the case", are a piece of the puzzle, but are they "unwilling" or incapable?

From a behaviorological perspective, people like this person, who say "I strongly suspect it's too late for our species" have a punishing effect on their audiences. Their basic impact is that they decrease behavior. Ironically, the behavior they decrease is spoken communication! Unless something reinforces and thus increases authentic human interaction (which is not the same as political debate), we are not going to address the issue of behavioral change, which is needed for mankind to survive. We don’t need any more professional speakers, lecturers, writers, movie-makers, actors, celebrities, gurus, authorities, lawyers, lobbyists and politicians, who pretend to communicate with their Noxious Verbal Behavior (NVB). What we need is people, who are capable of recognizing that only Sound Verbal Behavior (SVB) can help us to address and solve our problems. Everyone is needed!

Unless we have scientific evidence about what human interaction really is and what it is not, we are going to remain entrenched in our NVB, which dominates the world. The evidence this author is referring to can’t come from any book, lecture or movie, since it must be experienced individually by the communication participants, while they speak. To have SVB, there must be 100% agreement. This criterion, however, cannot be assumed. In SVB communicators continuously check with each other whether they understand each other and make sense to each other. In SVB communicators don’t aversively influence each other. Any aversive stimulation will immediately get the attention and is correctly analyzed as the NVB, which makes SVB impossible.

Reinforcement of SVB is going happen when NVB is no longer reinforced and thus extinguished. Since extinction takes time and involves operant as well as respondent processes, it is of utmost importance that people are educated about the contingencies that make such extinction possible. Without behaviorological knowledge we are unable to maintain these contingencies, although we may incidentally succeed in creating them. SVB will eventually replace NVB, just as behavioral science will eventually replaced superstition and explanatory fictions.