April
13, 2016
Written
by Maximus Peperkamp, M.S. Verbal Engineer
Dear Reader,
In “Religion as
Schedule-Induced Behavior” (2009) Strand writes that “this experience [a
monumental life event] is evoked rather than emitted, although it serves as the
basic unit for emitted behaviors” [words added by this writer]. In other words,
a life-threatening event, the foxhole experience, evokes respondent as well as
operant behavior. As I have already explained in my previous writings,
effortful and effortless behavior cannot occur esimultaneously; they always
occur sequentially. Likewise, Sound Verbal Behavior (SVB) and Noxious Verbal
Behavior (NVB) as well as graceful and acquired religious behavior also occur successively.
Strand thinks that “foundational
religious experiences” may be “more complex than simply responding to the frame
of self-as-infinite.” He quotes Ainslie (2001) who found that “concurrent
schedules may give rise to attentional switching, which is the basis for a
variety of experiential-behavioral phenomena including compulsions, addictions,
psycho-genic itches and pains.” In my analysis, mental health issues, political
grandiosity, as well as effortful religion are all labeled as being a function
of NVB.
This is where Strand’s analysis
and the SVB/NVB distinction overlap, as it highlights that behavioral phenomena
may be defined in terms of the patterning of responding that occurs across
multiple schedules.” I think the patterning of responding is explained very
well by SVB and NVB. However, we must account for how this “attentional
switching” comes about. When an elicited escape response is ineffective,
because it doesn’t change the foxhole situation, then, regardless of
attentional switchinging, there will be an involuntary immobilization response,
a freeze response and dissociation.
No comments:
Post a Comment