Baseball and PCT

[From Bruce Gregory (2010.07.25.1810 EDT)]

It is certainly not for lack of trying that Rick Marken has failed to get his message across to me
before now. I have been very slow to appreciate that PCT is about the control of perceptual
variables, not necessarily about behavior in general. I hope I now understand.

Do Big Papi Ortiz and A-Rod control the same perceptual variables when they face left-handed
pitchers? This is a perfectly respectable question and one that plays a paramount role in PCT
studies of behavior. Nonetheless, you can be a baseball fan without having any interest in the
answer to questions such as these. In much the same way, I claim, you can be greatly interested in
human behavior without being particularly interested in which perceptual variables are being
controlled by individual humans, when they play the lottery, for example.

I readily admit that I was confused by the claims that PCT represents a revolution in psychology. It
does indeed, but only if you are concerned with the questions that PCT addresses. You may not
doubt that Big Papi and A-Rod control perceptual variables and still not be overly concerned with
which perceptual variables they control. If you are, PCT is the way to go.

Bruce

(Gavin Ritz 2010.07.26.12.55NZT)

[From Bruce Gregory
(2010.07.25.1810 EDT)]

It is certainly not for lack of trying that
Rick Marken has failed to get his message
across to me

before now. I have been very slow to
appreciate that PCT is about the control of perceptual

variables, not necessarily about behavior
in general. I hope I now understand.

If one is steeped in psychology
stuff then it is hard to get ones head around. Because psychology has a very
low level of logic to its theories- ie cause-effect or stimulus-output.
Luckily I have come from engineering and my first taste of application psychology
was with a theory called Engpass Konzentrierten Strategy (EKS-a German Energy Cybernetic
Bottleneck Theory), which is so fringe and unheard of in the English speaking
world that I found PCT a really refreshing way to look at behaviour. And not at
all out of kilter with the theory of EKS, in fact fits into the EKS theory very
well.

This doesn’t mean
that I think it’s a slam dunk theory not by a long way. I have great
trouble reconciling many aspects of the theory particularly some of the HPCT
levels. This is probably only my struggle because I already have in my memory
and knowledge banks very particular concepts that just quite don’t gel
well.

Rick
has a lot to offer I think his idea of looking at behavioural economics is great.

Regards

Gavin

Do Big Papi Ortiz and A-Rod control the same
perceptual variables when they face left-handed

pitchers? This is a perfectly respectable question and
one that plays a paramount role in PCT

studies of behavior. Nonetheless, you can be a
baseball fan without having any interest in the

answer to questions such as these. In much the same
way, I claim, you can be greatly interested in

human behavior without being particularly interested
in which perceptual variables are being

controlled by individual humans, when they play the
lottery, for example.

I readily admit that I was confused by the claims that
PCT represents a revolution in psychology. It

does indeed, but only if you are concerned with the
questions that PCT addresses. You may not

doubt that Big Papi and A-Rod control perceptual
variables and still not be overly concerned with

which perceptual variables they control. If you are,
PCT is the way to go.

Bruce