Another Leach Gem, Regulation

[From RIck Marken (950710.2130)]

Bill Leach (950710.18:37 U.S. Eastern Time Zone) --

PCT tests for and studies control of perception.

The disturbances should range in magnitude and "phase" (if possible).
Ideally, for studies in the realm that we are presently capable of
modeling, disturbances should not be such as to cause a loss of control
by the subject.

The PCTer is NOT particularly interested in HOW the specific control loop
set came into being. That such came about through "learning",
"experience" and doubtlessly contains random components in the process is
just plain accepted in PCT (for now).

And I can only add... "yes".

Me:

show that the organism is not regulating but varying its output, as
necessary to protect a perception from disturbance.

Bill Leach (950710.21:12 U.S. Eastern Time Zone)

A "regulator" IS a closed loop negative feedback controller. The
process of "regulating" is the process of varying an _output_ to
maintain a "parameter" (perception) at a relatively constant value
against disturbance (ie: Pressure Regulator, Voltage Regulator, etc).

I agree. I'm afraid my statement above was not clear. What I was
suggesting was that we show (as we have) that organisms DON'T regulate
(control) output; they VARY output to regulate (control) input.

Psychologists always talk about "control", "regulation" or "guidance"
of behavior, as though it were behavioral output that is being
controlled (by the organism or the environment). All schools of psychology
talk this way -- cognitive, behaviorist, etc. That's how it's easy to
tell that they have no idea what organisms are doing when they behave;
organisms are, of course, controlling their own input (as Bruce Abbott's
(950710.2030 EST) lovely new ratio data show rather clearly once again).

Best

Rick