October 10, 2016

October 10, 2016 

Written by Maximus Peperkamp, M.S. Verbal Engineer

Dear Reader,

If we want to know why we engage in Sound Verbal Behavior (SVB) or in Noxious Verbal Behavior (NVB) we must recognize the circumstances in which they occur. These circumstances exist right now, but they have also existed way back in our past. Our high rates of NVB and our low rates of SVB, which cause our relationship problems, can be explained by the kind of people we have talked with in our past and by the kind of people we are currently still talking with and can’t stop talking with.

If we were most often exposed to those who were having high rates of SVB and low rates of NVB, we would also be having high rates of SVB and low rates of NVB, but the fact is that most of us have been and continue to be exposed to high rates of NVB and low rates of SVB. This is how we acquired our high rates of NVB and of low rates of SVB.

Our behavior is lawful; if it is reinforced, it increases, if it is punished, it decreases. We have had a few instances of SVB, but as long as these instances were not reinforced by others, they were less likely to happen in our future. Likewise, if instances of NVB were not punished, but were reinforced, they were more likely to happen in our future.

It is because SVB is punished and NVB is reinforced that we have such high rates of NVB and such low rates of SVB. The exact same thing can be said about mental health issues. If a person suffers from addiction, neuroses, psychoses or depressive thoughts, we must infer that these behaviors have been and continue to be reinforced. Indeed, unless we trace their behavior to the environments, that is, to the people, who reinforce these behaviors, we have no way of altering these behaviors.

This scientific account of human behavior runs counter to our common belief in an inner agent, which presumably causes us to behave the way we do. Although this matter was emphatically addressed by radical behaviorism, it was never stated that this fictitious belief is a product of NVB. Only in SVB do we admit that we affect each other and are affected by each other, that we bi-directionally influence each other, that behavior is explained by the principle of bi-directional causality.

Our tendency to adhere to uni-directional causality, commonly known as my way or the highway, characterizes NVB in which speakers dominate the listener and speak at, but not with him or her. NVB, in which we describe our feelings and thoughts as causing our actions, prevents us from taking note of the fact that subjective events within our own skin always co-occur with objective events that happen outside of our skin.

We can only articulate what causes our SVB or our NVB during SVB, as in NVB we adhere to our separate roles as speakers and as listeners, which stimulate and maintain our hierarchical social structures. Only in SVB are we allowed to speak with each other as equals. As our private speech can become publicly expressed in SVB, we find that something is directly observable which wasn’t observable before. Actually, we should be saying that something which wasn’t directly audible before, which was never before expressed, is now expressed and thus audible.

As we explore and express, by listening to ourselves while we speak, how we have been affected by previous speakers and are affected by current speakers, we hear the difference between SVB and NVB. We are surprised we all agree on this distinction as we had no idea this would be possible. Only in SVB do we stop inventing inner causes of behavior as the external causes are now emphatically clear to us. We speak not because we decide to speak, but because we can speak and we listen not because we have to listen, but because we want to listen.

October 9, 2016

October 9, 2016 

Written by Maximus Peperkamp, M.S. Verbal Engineer

Dear Reader,

Usually what we think to ourselves is not what we say to each other. That part of us which we believe is making us speak is seldom the same as that part which we believe is making us listen. Our way of talking is such that the speaker and the listener are perceived as two entirely different entities. When speaking and listening behavior happen at different rates we are in conflict with ourselves and with others.

When a person listens to him or herself, while he or she speaks, it is evident to that the person the person who listens is the same as the person who speaks. There is no speaker inside of us who causes us to speak and there is no listener inside of us who causes us to listen. These fictitious entities only exist due to our common way of talking.

During Noxious Verbal Behavior the listener who is not the speaker is disconnected from the speaker. The NVB speaker speaks at, but not with the listener. By contrast, in Sound Verbal Behavior, the speaker speaks with and takes turns with the listener. There is a connection between the two, in spite of the fact that they are separate entities.

During SVB the speaking and listening behaviors remain joined, in other words, each speaker listens to him or herself while he or she speaks. In NVB, by contrast, there is no turn-taking between the speaker and the listener, consequently, only the speaker talks and since he or she is not listening to him or herself, he or she is talking at the listener. In NVB, separation of the speaker and listener in public speech sets the stage for the separation of the speaker and the listener in private speech.  

Our belief in an inner agent, which causes us to behave in any particular way is stimulated and maintained by our NVB. The “I” who wants to say something is as non-existent as the “I” who says something. Surely, speaking and listening behavior occur, but just as there is no walker, no eater and no swimmer, there is no speaker and there is no listener.

We experience that our behavior isn’t caused by an inner entity called a self only SVB. During NVB, we may be able to admit that this is true, but yet we don’t experience it. Although the experience that there is no self which is causing our behavior is different from the knowledge that there is no self, one will effortlessly lead to the other in SVB.

Correct understanding of the causation of behavior will release energy that can then be used to identify and promote positive behaviors. Our high rates of NVB prevent us from agreeing on what are positive and what are negative behaviors. NVB justifies negative behaviors, but we can only acknowledge this if we engage in SVB. If we agree what are negative and positive behaviors we know what needs to be decreased and increased. Currently, due to our NVB, we increase many negative behaviors, but we keep failing to increase our positive behaviors.

Even if we have some agreement about what constitutes negative or positive behavior we often fail to decrease the latter and increase the former as we don’t view these behaviors as stimulated and maintained by environmental variables. While we overemphasize problems which need to be solved, we punish the behaviors which need to be decreased.

The only proper procedure for enhancing behavior is reinforcement. Behaviors which we would like to increase don’t miraculously appear; they require reinforcement which must be provided by other human beings. Another problem with our belief in a behavior-controlling self is that we overemphasize the importance of punishment and forget to reinforce the positive behaviors which we would like to increase.  

October 8, 2016

October 8, 2016

Written by Maximus Peperkamp, M.S. Verbal Engineer

Dear Reader,

What do we mean when we say someone was getting on our nerves or under our skin? Something positive happening inside of us was changed by someone who was negative, but who was outside and perhaps all over us. Presumably we can prevent people from getting on our nerves by getting a thicker skin. Although we talk about change which is only skin-deep, we believe we can change negativity into positivity inside of us, which then protects us from negative people who are outside of us.

As we develop our so-called firmer boundaries, no one messes with our brain anymore and as we become less affected by the situation, that is, by others and we believe we have become more confident. Therapists teach mental health clients every day they can’t control the behavior of others, but they can control their own. It is this common line of thinking, which erroneously changes external causes into internal causes of behavior, which doesn’t and can’t result into improvement.

No matter what we end up believing, our behavior isn’t caused by internal stimuli. Our belief in an inner behavior-causing agent has continued as we haven’t acknowledged the event that changed external into internal causation. I am referring to our common way of talking which I call Noxious Verbal Behavior (NVB). During NVB the speaker makes the listener responsible for how he or she impacts him or her. Basically, in NVB the speaker forces the listener to become an enabler.

The fact that the speaker either has a positive or a negative effect on the listener is not caused by the listener. However, this only becomes clear if we adhere to the science of human behavior, which teaches us that behavior is selected by the circumstances we are in. Therapists who are able to provide the kind of verbal support, which stimulates improvement in the mental health condition of their clients, point out to them that their way of talking, which immediately and positively impacts their clients, results into the client’s behavioral changes.

The environment, that is, the therapist shapes the behavior of client. In other words, therapy is based on the scientific finding that we can change the behavior of others. As clients become aware about how other people maintain their behaviors, they realize that the previous instructions aimed at changing the environment within their own skin, could never result into the outcomes they were promised by them.

Especially clients who have had a lot of therapy and therapists often report the discouraging experience that nothing has really worked for them. Those who are most vocal about their legitimate frustrations are individuals with bipolar disorder, but many people with other diagnoses express a similar sense of despair. The rage, described as a symptom, in reality is a person’s response to how he or she feels mistreated.

Each time a mental health client is told that he or she has the power to change him or herself he or she is set up for failure. As these failures accumulate they feel betrayed. They have tried and tried, but their treatment simply didn’t work. My clients are stimulated to discriminate Sound Verbal Behavior (SVB) and Noxious Verbal Behavior (NVB). This treatment works and they proudly express their incremental progress.

Once clients are able to recognize SVB and NVB, they acknowledge the extent to which their symptoms are decreased by individuals in their environment who produce SVB, but are increased by individuals who produce NVB. By identifying these two kinds of influences they are eventually able to stay away and withdraw from NVB and approach SVB.  By focusing their attention on the environment that is outside of their skin they begin to improve; in different environments they can thrive.

October 7, 2016

October 7, 2016

Written by Maximus Peperkamp, M.S. Verbal Engineer

Dear Reader,

Whenever people speak up or make their voices heard, they engage in Noxious Verbal Behavior (NVB). In each case they raise their voice which is experienced by the listener as an aversive stimulus. Yet, they do this in an attempt to get the listener to listen to them. They felt they weren’t listened to. By loudly stating their case they think they can coerce others to listen to them. Such assertive people want to be taken serious and want others to know they are not to be messed with.

NVB speakers are ready to fight back whatever according to them is wrong and they are going to make a stand even if things are going to get ugly. We want to have a voice and if we are not listened to we get confrontational. Who cares about the freedom of speech? If nobody is listening to us it seems as if we don’t even have a voice anymore. This sets the stage for others who then presumably become our voice. They talk about peace, compassion, collaboration and progress, but the fact is: political, religious and corporate leaders constantly engage in NVB.

In Sound Verbal Behavior (SVB) we don’t need to make our voice heard, we don’t need to speak up, as we are listening to each other. Moreover, in SVB we are listening to ourselves while we speak. That process sets the stage for listening to others. Without this listening to ourselves we are incapable of listening to others. We are not listening to each other as long as we are not listening to ourselves. In NVB we force others to listen to us, but in SVB we listen to ourselves and others listen to a speaker who listens to him or herself. Such a speaker sounds different than a NVB speaker. The SVB speaker sounds good to the listener.

  

Even if we are not very used to it, we all produce at times some SVB. It is a big problem that worldwide SVB is reinforced much less often than NVB. We have given many fictional explanations for why human beings can’t get along. The reality is that they already get along each time they engage in SVB. Without SVB nothing would get done in this world.

SVB naturally occurs when people affiliate peacefully. NVB also occurs naturally as it is the sound that determines our place in the hierarchy. SVB transcends NVB. Each successful couple knows, although they go overboard on NVB, they get back on track with each other with SVB.

It cannot be a coincidence that across the globe we find higher rates of NVB than SVB. Yet, it is obvious that certain cultures have higher rates of SVB than others. This means that in certain cultures there is more equality than in others. We can only have SVB when we are equal, when we are no longer set apart due to hierarchical, biological, social or economic differences. SVB is for equal rights for equal opportunity.

SVB also deals with resources and with the environment. With SVB we will all have access to resources as we don’t compete with each other. Moreover, in SVB we consider each other as our environment. SVB involves a paradigm shift as we come to terms with our evolutionary heritage. Of course, SVB doesn’t change our genetic endowment, but it highlights how often our relationships are jeopardized by our biology.

Babies innately scream for their mother’s attention. NVB, in which the speaker demands the listener’s attention, has its roots in evolutionary history. However, our biology is shaped by our environment and this is how SVB and NVB come about. Just like languages, SVB and NVB are learned behaviors. Even if we were raised within a particular verbal community, we can move away and still learn another language.

It is often said that change can only happen if the situation demands it. When speakers demand the listener’s attention they produce NVB. Demanding speakers have not produced any change. Change can and will only happen when the speakers stop demanding the listener’s attention. We stop being demanding speakers when we listen to ourselves while we speak. Only when we hear our own voice will we notice if we produce SVB or NVB. The SVB speaker doesn’t aversively influence the listener.

October 6, 2016

October 6, 2016

Written by Maximus Peperkamp, M.S. Verbal Engineer

Dear Reader,

As our voice changes, the content of our conversation changes; we will say different things when we change how we speak. What we say is function of how we say it. Our sound is the independent variable and a change in our sound causes a change in our conversation, which is the dependent variable. The distinction between Sound Verbal Behavior (SVB) and Noxious Verbal Behavior (NVB) brings our awareness to the fact that a change in our voice precedes a change in our conversation.

As our tone of voice changes, our conversation changes, but it doesn’t work the other way around: a change in our words doesn’t bring about a change in our voice and a change of the conversation. Although people can fake it, once they know the SVB/NVB distinction, it is evident that faking it is always effortful and sets the stage for NVB, while genuine and effective conversation is effortless and sets the stage for SVB.

We can control our way of talking, increase our SVB and decrease our NVB, if we know what causes each. We must learn to discriminate SVB and NVB. Nobody has told us that a speaker can only have SVB as long as his or her voice is experienced by the listener as an appetitive stimulus. However, each time the speaker’s voice is again experienced by the listener as an aversive stimulus, this speaker engages in NVB.

The listener determines whether the speaker is having SVB or NVB. Of course, the listener can only let the speaker know, if the speaker lets the listener speak. The speaker who engages in NVB uses Voice I, but the speaker who engages in SVB uses Voice II. Correct discrimination of Voice I and Voice II is predicted to cause an effortless shift that will decrease the rate of Voice I and increase the rate of Voice II. As NVB is put on an extinction schedule, this shift will occur less and less.

With ongoing SVB it will become clear that our superstitions and our pre-scientific explanations about why we talked the way we did, have always strengthened our NVB. With ongoing SVB we are at long last released from the prison of our superstitions and stimulated to be attentive to the real causes of why we talk and behave the way we do.

Another joyful finding of increased levels of SVB is that it is possible to continue to understand each other. Given the common high rates of NVB there is no chance to even envision such possibility. Moreover, our communication experiences are so negative that misunderstandings are more likely to happen. Due to our long history of unresolved problems we anticipate misunderstanding and we recreate and perpetuate it.

The only way in which we will be able to understand our own behavior is if we learn to talk about it in the way that will allow us to understand it. We may have become knowledgeable about the science of human behavior, but this doesn’t mean that we have learned the right way to talk about behavior. The dissemination of behavioral science continues to be impaired as long as this learning process is not given attention.

In spite of our high rates of NVB, we still experience a few instances of SVB. Although such moments of sanity are of course essential to our survival, they don’t occur with enough regularity and predictability to be experienced as a relief from the stress and anxiety involved in NVB.

As SVB so seldom occurs we think of it only in terms of the problems it seems to create. However, it is the absence of SVB and the presence of NVB which creates and maintains all our problems. Only when SVB can continue for an extended period of time will we be able to open up to the possibility of an interaction that is without aversive stimulation.

Positive spoken communication is not something to be dreamed about, but must be put into practice as soon as possible. There is no need for approval from some higher authority. You can and you must verify that each time when you listen to yourself while you speak, you will be able to experience SVB in which the speaker and the listener are one.