March 25, 2016

March 25, 2016

Written by Maximus Peperkamp, M.S. Verbal Engineer

Dear Reader,

By embracing the distinction between “graceful” and “effortful” religious behaviors, described by Paul Strand in “Religion as Schedule-Induced Behavior” (2009), we learn a lot about how we talk with each other. When we talk about these matters, we agree that only the “graceful” way of talking can be considered as a religious behavior, but that our “effortful” way of talking involves the absence of and at best the longing for religious behavior. Stated differently, “Many aspects of religious experience and behavior” have been “overlooked or disregarded,” as we have not paid any attention to religious vocal verbal behavior versus non-religious vocal verbal behavior. 

Only religious scholars, who mostly do not talk with each other about these matters, accept the written distinction between “graceful” and “effortful” religious behavior. However, once they engage in Sound Verbal Behavior (SVB) about this topic, it would become clear that “effortful” religious behavior is of course a contradiction. This contradiction has continued to exist as writings have blurred the lines between “graceful” and “effortless.” 

Strand is just another one those religious scholars, who states “Religious behavior is no different than other operant behavior; it occurs to the extent that is confers political, economical and social advantages.”  What can be glanced from this definition is that it refers to “effortful” religious behavior and not to “graceful” religious behavior. “Graceful” behavior only has to do with mutual “social advantages”, but not with “political” or “economical advantages.” In other words, our “graceful” religious behavior only maps onto SVB, while our struggle for “political” or “economical advantages” always requires our involvement in Noxious Verbal Behavior (NVB). 

It should be stated squarely that our non-religious way of talking, NVB, is an operant behavior, “a behavior that was established through reinforcement” which, as we all know, “eventually becomes resistant to extinction.” Our SVB, on the other hand, is a non-operant schedule-induced behavior.  As “a rule-governed behavior” it is not susceptible to consequences and it persists regardless of circumstances. In spite of the ubiquity of NVB, SVB continues.