For a more nurturing full-equation ABA and free-form expression, thereof.

[Guest guest]

Hi All,

People are opposing me on the ultra-logical sensory/reinforcement

side of the more nurturing " full-equation " ABA (encompassing RDI,

etc.) because it seems to justify the less tenable position of

accepting and applying " free-form " language and the abolition of

(the) official language/s, otherwise? (Skip that part for now?)

People are taking me more seriously now, for all that I'm

communicating... and making sense of, thereof, something many

don't/didn't " more deeply " stand for, perhaps... but from that

objectivity, of objectivity, of my being more sensitive, receptive

and perceptive, (intuitive) perhaps, and correspondingly, more

reasonable, intelligent and understanding, of The results, of

analysis, of a greater understanding of more, perhaps, to do with

becoming more aware of the need for a more " nurturing " ABA.

This can be equated to the evolution of " free-form " language towards

more meaningful communication and a greater understanding of more,

thereof, something I feel is highly relevant to Verbal Behavior, DTT

and NET if not so much of the curriculum (and methodology) developed

so far with respect to the " sensory and reinforcement " side of ABA.

The sensory-reinforcement side of ABA could be (should be?) as

important and intense (as meaningful) as the instructional side of

it. What I'm talking about with respect to a more nuturing " full-

equation " ABA and free form language, of communication, thereof.

This model of ABA encompasses everything logical " and " necessary

to " nurturing " an individual to all that it can be. Look it up in

the dictionary folks. Nurturing. " Training " with the

necessary " reinforcement/s " to get the job done, to help the

individual become the most that it can be. It's obvious to " me "

where we tend to fall short of putting all the pieces together.

Reinforcement/s? (Includes the " sensory, " of " nourishing, " of

life.) " I " could use more of that myself.

Mike,

I ABA

ABA for Understanding .

Save for Mind Language Objectivity day? (True Day?)

Some people are opposing me because I justify/validate the

application of " free-form " language with my expansion on sensory

reinforcement for communication and what that can provide to the

training, if not of my more " conflicting " position of abolitionist

of (the) official languages, otherwise. (!)

Speech also entails the " right " to expression " and " understanding in

this respect of the Individual, of that position, of freedom, of

speech, of Understanding. " Correcting " communication does " not "

reinforce communication. Adjust to that? By learning what it is

yourself. By trying to " understand " more for yourself, first,

thereof.

Communication is a " multi-way " street (the alternative is

dictatorship, of " programming " ?) and " should " be the " primary " goal

of our training/programming which it clearly is not? ... or so

it " too " often seems to me, of one excuse or another, but usually of

a bias to only understand what we already understand ... which

is " not " understanding at all, and where we ultimately fail.

Don't try to make this the " memory work " of " knowledge, "

merely " filed, " thereof, for " later " analysis, please? [As of

a " platform " for developing meaningful speech? .. .] I hear

enough " echolalia " as it is, not just from the kids! .. . Lessons

from us to them? I can dream, and analyze, and more, thereof.

Teach for Understanding.