[Bulk] Re: Teaching PCT

CSGnet Archive CSG2006
1

[Martin Taylor 2006.05.16.23.16 Census Day in Canada]

[From Rick Marken (2006.05.16.1640)]

Marc Abrams (2006.05.16.0814)--

It's because of the feedback connection between
interacting in individuals that people can counter control others who
are trying to control them.

Yes, and this "feedback" is metaphorical. not physical.

Actually, it's quite physical. It's not metaphorical at all. See Tom's studies of interacting controllers. He couldn't have modeled these interactions if the feedback connections were only metaphorical.

Quite so. Signals don't have to be carried over wires in order to be signals. The reason I got into PCT was that I had independently developed a theory of dialogue that depended on the feedback loops through the dialogue partners. It was only later that I discovered my theory was "only" a special case of PCT.

I can't understand why Marc keeps insisting that feedback involving perceptions of other people is only metaphorical.

But in order to really appreciate the significance of the PCT revolution in the social (and life) sciences you really have to know how the social sciences currently go about their business of studying behavior.

I think you also have to have some appreciation of the engineering science of control. I kow that it took me several months on CSGnet before I becamse convinced that the feedback being discussed was real physical feedback, subject to analytic equations, even though my Layered Protocol Theory used the same concepts. Even then, I still had this hold-back in my thinking, that we were talking metaphor. We aren't, and you do have to understand at least a little bit of control theory to appreciate that.

Martin

2

From [Marc Abrams (2006.05.17.0812)]

In a message dated 5/16/2006 11:24:36 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, mmt-csg@ROGERS.COM writes:

[Martin Taylor 2006.05.16.23.16 Census Day in Canada]
How marvelous, Census day in Canada. Any big parties?

[From Rick Marken (2006.05.16.1640)]

Marc Abrams (2006.05.16.0814)–

It’s because of the feedback connection between
interacting in individuals that people can counter control others who
are trying to control them.

Yes, and this “feedback” is metaphorical. not physical.

Actually, it’s quite physical. It’s not metaphorical at all. See
Tom’s studies of interacting controllers. He couldn’t have modeled
these interactions if the feedback connections were only
metaphorical.

Quite so. Signals don’t have to be carried over wires in order to be
signals.
Signals? And what kind of signals are transmitted between individuals? I was always under the impression that any “signals” that took place in our bodies originated there as well.

Does this mean every time I hear a sound, see something, or smell something a new signal from the environment is going through my body?

Do these signals cause cancer like ultraviolet waves can?

The reason I got into PCT was that I had independently
developed a theory of dialogue
Of course.

that depended on the feedback loops
through the dialogue partners. It was only later that I discovered my
theory was “only” a special case of PCT.
See that, you learn something new each day. You see Rick, it pays to expose your ignorance.

Here I was walking around not knowing that these “signals” exist.

BTW Martin, how long do these signals stay in the body and how do you get rid of old ones or are they “used up”?

I can’t understand why Marc keeps insisting that feedback involving
perceptions of other people is only metaphorical.
I can see why you are confused. But you helped clear it all up for me.

Rick said:

But in order to really appreciate the significance of the PCT
revolution in the social (and life) sciences you really have to know
how the social sciences currently go about their business of
studying behavior.

I think you also have to have some appreciation of the engineering
science of control. I kow that it took me several months on CSGnet
before I becamse convinced that the feedback being discussed was real
physical feedback, subject to analytic equations, even though my
Layered Protocol Theory used the same concepts. Even then, I still
had this hold-back in my thinking, that we were talking metaphor. We
aren’t, and you do have to understand at least a little bit of
control theory to appreciate that.
Martin this all doesn’t quite add up. You attributed your understanding of “signals” to your theory of dialogue yet here you say you were still not convinced after several months on CSGnet with the theory under your belt, so what was the final determining factor?

Fascinating Martin, thanks.

Regards,

Marc

···

Martin

3

From [Marc Abrams (2006.05.17.1022)]

In a message dated 5/16/2006 11:24:36 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, mmt-csg@ROGERS.COM writes:

[Martin Taylor 2006.05.16.23.16 Census Day in Canada]

I think you also have to have some appreciation of the engineering
science of control. I kow that it took me several months on CSGnet
before I becamse convinced that the feedback being discussed was real
physical feedback, subject to analytic equations, even though my
Layered Protocol Theory used the same concepts. Even then, I still
had this hold-back in my thinking, that we were talking metaphor. We
aren’t, and you do have to understand at least a little bit of
control theory to appreciate that.
BTW Martin if I may be so bold. What grade did you get in your Methods course?

If you got less than a “b” than that might have accounted for the slowness in your being able to “pick-up” PCT. At least according to Rick and since you had nothing to say about that I assume you agree with him.

If so, you may want to go back to school so you might be able to have intelligent exchanges with Rick on PCT and other matters of world importance, like George Bush.

Since you were so nice in clearing up my misconceptions I thought I might help you along with yours as well.

So, now it seems not only do you need a “b” in a methods course, you need to have an engineering background as well.

A very interesting combo to say the least, but in line with what Dag has been saying for years.

PCT is for engineers. Now we simply need to add, engineers who got a “b” in a Psych methods course.

Anyone new to CSGnet should be informed of this to avoid undue pain for all concerned.

Happy Census Day & its time to beam me up Scottie, I’m ready to go.

Marc