June 15, 2016

June 15, 2016 

Written by Maximus Peperkamp, M.S. Behavioral Engineer

Dear Reader, 

This is my second response to the “Epistemological Barriers to Radical Behaviorism” by Donohue et. al. (1998). I like to use the fond that is  used by behaviorologists in their journal. They can if they want to read my blog and peer-review my writings, but if they choose not to that, it will not stop me from thinking about the science of human behavior. 

It has often been said or written “science moves forward not in a continuous advance, but rather in upheavals distinguished by ruptures in current scientific thought” (Tiles, 1984). This is because of how we talk. To the extent scientists engaged in Sound Verbal Behavior (SVB) they moved “forward in continuous advance” with “scientific thought”, but to the extent they engaged in Noxious Verbal Behavior (NVB), they created and then had to deal with “upheavals” and “ruptures.” 

 “Breaks” which presumably “lead to novel approaches of science as a whole” are distinguished by temporary changes in the way we talk. Unknowingly, we changed from NVB to SVB when something was more accurately understood, which then led to a more advanced way of life. 

As we have come to prefer writing and reading about these advances more than speaking and listening, it has become less and less obvious to us that scientific progress has always depended on how we interact with our environment, on how we behave verbally as well as nonverbally. 

The SVB/NVB distinction focuses our attention on the nonverbal basis for our verbal learning.  When we read that “science is periodically punctuated by revolutions” (Kuhn, 1970), we ought to acknowledge that  people from time to time are incapable of talking with each other.

June 14, 2016

June 14, 2016

Written by Maximus Peperkamp, M.S. Verbal Engineer

Dear Reader,

When I read “Epistemological Barriers to Radical Behaviorism” by Donohue, Callaghan & Ruckstuhl (1998), I was immediately inclined to change this title it into Epistemological Barriers to Sound Verbal Behavior (SVB). It starts with “The historian and philosopher of science Gaston Bachelard proposed the concept of epistemological barriers to describe the intellectual challenges encountered by scientists in their work.” I think that “epistemological barriers” are overrated.

The “intellectual challenges encountered by scientists in their work” are NOT “epistemological barriers”, but are ways in which private and public speech, their verbal behavior, has been conditioned. I don’t think scientists must “overcome barriers or obstacles posed by their prior views.” As their views describe how they speak, I insist they must acquire a new way of talking.

The way of talking which contains and maintains these so-called “epistemological barriers” is Noxious Verbal Behavior (NVB), but the kind of talking that dissolves these “epistemological barriers” is called Sound Verbal Behavior (SVB). Thus, “The intellectual journeys students pursuing advanced studies face when attempting to accept cognitive psychology or radical behaviorism” are determined by how their teachers speak to them.

The SVB/NVB distinction brings our attention to the fact that “epistemological barriers” are, of course, always a function of how we talk about matters. It is NOT whether “folk psychological beliefs that students typically hold when entering these studies pose less challenge to cognitive psychology than to radical behaviorism”, what really matters here is whether what is taught is taught by means of SVB or by NVB!

As long as what is taught continues to be taught as it has always been taught, by means of NVB, students will be more inclined to accept cognitive psychology than radical behaviorism. In other words, NVB has always paved the way for more explanatory fictions, while SVB is indispensable for an environmental, scientific account of behavior. Radical behaviorism has remained small due to NVB, but will reach millions with SVB.  

June 13, 2016

June 13, 2016

Written by Maximus Peperkamp, M.S. Verbal Engineer

Dear Reader,

When you first hear about the Sound Verbal Behavior (SVB)/Noxious Verbal Behavior (NVB) distinction it is necessary to go back and forth between SVB and NVB so that you get a sense to recognize which is which, but once you know the difference between them, the only thing that matters is to increase SVB and decrease NVB.

NVB will decrease by itself as you increase your SVB. No time is wasted on trying to decrease NVB. People have tried to prevent all sorts of negative behavior, but they remain trapped in that meaningless activity as they don’t know how to stimulate and maintain behavior that will make them skillful, successful and happy. 

Once you know SVB, you have learned something which you didn’t know before. It is not that others don’t want to have SVB...they don’t know how to have it. You have so many problems because you don’t know how to create and maintain the situation in which problems don’t occur. 

By changing the way in which you talk, you are going to be able to live a new kind of life. I live such a life. I have changed due to my exploration and knowledge of the SVB/NVB distinction. If you want to know more about my life, I will tell you about it and talk with you. 

This writing is to inform you about my life. You too will reach that point at which your involvement in NVB has simply become a thing of the past, in which your participation in SVB will be your reality and future.

As our SVB history counteracts our history with NVB, you will be more certain and knowledgeable about your actions. However, none of this will happen by itself. Unless you experiment and familiarize yourself with these universal response classes, these descriptions will not be of any help. Once you will begin to select them there will be many ongoing positive consequences. 

June 12, 2016

June 12, 2016

Written by Maximus Peperkamp, M.S. Verbal Engineer

Dear Reader,

Although it may appear as if I write the same thing, this is not the case. It may seem like that as you don’t notice the constant refinements I make. Once you notice my creative modifications, you know there is no end to refining Sound Verbal Behavior (SVB) and that writing about it can be an important part of learning.

Every time a speaker refers to another speaker to back up or prove what he or she is saying, it increases the speaker’s Noxious Verbal Behavior (NVB) response rate. By contrast, the SVB speaker doesn’t need anyone’s approval and always speaks on his or her own authority. 

This writing promotes ongoing SVB. Nobody’s permission is needed. We don’t know what SVB is like because there was never a circumstance in which it was deliberately and skillfully continued. I now know what it takes to create that circumstance. Even though there was nobody to continue it with, I have continued SVB on my own. 

Had I not known how to continue with SVB on my own, I would have, like everyone else, given up on it. Nobody insists on SVB like I do since they don’t know how to. Once you know what I know you will also insist on it. 

It will not your choice to have SVB, but your ability, you skill, which makes it possible. If you don’t speak Chinese, you will not miraculously get in the position where all of a sudden you are capable of speaking it. 

You can only learn Chinese by bringing yourself in the circumstances in which it can be learned. The same is true for SVB. You cannot and will not learn it as long as you remain affected by contingencies which stimulate NVB. You need another contingency for SVB and this contingency must remain in place. Only in the very beginning does it help to switch between SVB and NVB.

June 11, 2016

June 11, 2016

Written by Maximus Peperkamp, M.S. Verbal Engineer

Dear Reader,

Our spoken communication is a bad as it is as we keep referring to what others have said and thought and we keep preventing ourselves and each other from saying what we ourselves think. Yes reader, believe it or not, you have your own thoughts, which can be verbalized.

As long as unexpressed thoughts only remain part of thinking, they become disconnected from public speech and will cause you trouble. This is what happens due to Noxious Verbal Behavior (NVB). We believe in freedom of speech, but our private speech separates us from and contradicts with the reality of our public speech. 

We don’t want to say what we think because it can get us in trouble. However, this is only the case in NVB. In Sound Verbal Behavior (SVB), on the other hand, we can say what we think and we are reinforced for that. 

In SVB there is no separation between our public and private speech, they are one and the same speech, but in NVB, we are bound to get stuck and identified with what we believe to be our own thoughts and beliefs. 

In SVB, communicators don’t need to pretend to have an identity, but in NVB they are punished if they don’t identify with parts of overt public speech occurring at a covert level, which seem to have a life of their own. 

In SVB you bring your private speech into public speech by talking out loud and by listening to yourself. You will be surprised to find out how reinforcing it is to be alone and to express what you think all by yourself.

Although you have been conditioned by NVB to punish yourself for expressing your covert speech in public speech, if you listen to yourself long enough, that is, if you pay attention to how you sound, you will notice that the punishment decreases and eventually completely stops. By that time you will be having SVB by yourself.