July 15, 2016

July 15, 2016 

Written by Maximus Peperkamp, M.S. Behavioral Engineer

Dear Reader, 

This is my thirtieth response to “Epistemological Barriers to Radical Behaviorism” by Donohue et al. (1998). This paper is a stepping stone for the reader to understand the distinction between Sound Verbal Behavior (SVB) and Noxious Verbal Behavior (NVB). Each line taken from this paper illustrates the need for the shaping of a new behavior.

Many responses to this paper have been written as many things become possible only if we know the SVB/NVB distinction. My writings better analyze the “Epistemological Barriers of Radical Behaviorism.” I agree  “Language is simply a type of behavior (Skinner, 1957); it is subject to the same contingencies of reinforcement as all other behavior.”

Behaviorist have often written that “The same goes for thoughts and feelings; they certainly exist, but they are behaviors, no more and no less (O'Donohue & Szymanski, 1996). They do not have unique causal status as such in the analysis of behavior.” However, although they “do not have unique causal status” thoughts and feelings do have a unique status in the behavioral repertoire of most people.

When behaviorists write about thoughts and feelings that “they certainly exist, but……..”, they make something which is very important to individuals into something which is “no more and no less” important than any other behavior. Whether it is true or not doesn’t matter, what people think and feel is considered to be more important than any other behavior, by them. Any behavioral analyst involved in changing a person’s behavior knows about the primacy of thoughts and feelings.

If a therapist doesn’t give his or her total attention to what the client is thinking and feeling, he or she is unable to establish a relationship and the therapy will fail. This is exactly why the promotion of radical behaviorism has gone wrong. The SVB/NVB distinction is badly needed as it restores the importance of what we are thinking and feeling.