Tim,
This is just my take on therapy with PCT; the MOL is a starting and finishing
place. On a guess it is about 25-33% of the picture. After you introduce
yourself to a Ct, you will try to establish rapport, (in PCT terms you are
"Aligning Worlds", yours and the CT's perceptions) and find out "why" the Ct
is at your door. Because, people don't seek solutions for problems they are
NOT experiencing, you know the person is asking for help, even before they
open their mouth.
MOL is a great part of the process - It helps you and the Ct map out the
levels the person can experience and report on. The Why's are going up and
the How's are going down the levels.
One thing you may find is, not everyone has all the LEVELS developed. The
higher levels, as you know take longer to experience error than the lower
levels, also they take longer to develop. An observation I have noticed. I
am sure you are aware of the solution of resolving conflict at one level is by
changing the reference signal at a higher level. But, what if there is not a
higher level to appeal to; or there is a higher level, but the control
processes are not fully developed. I have seen only one paper on the stages
of development using PCT.
I can't begin to guess at what or how or why another level can develop - but I
know we are not born with all the levels in place, I know conflict, (error
signals) trial and "error" must play a part.
It is important to map out the levels, but what to do next after the MOL's
I don't have a name for this next part so let's just call it "Method of
Conflict" - MOC; because, you are trying to find the conflicts/problems in the
control systems.
Part 1) Is the problem an "intra-level?" Is the conflict between two or more
competing control process?
Part 2) Is the problem an "inter-level" breakdown? Is there a higher level to
appeal to?
Part 3) Is the problem an "break in the loop?"
At this point you're about 2/3- 3/4 of the way here.
The first two parts lead to a setup for "chasing the problem around the loop."
Is the problem an "break in the loop?"
Chasing the problem around the loop:
Mostly, I start with the Reference signal above the level of conflict
discovered by the Method of Levels. I help the person evaluate their goals,
wants, needs or desires. I start here, only because the Reference signals
(Intentions or Goals) are usually where the problems lay. For example, the Ct
may have the knowledge and abilities to obtain a goal, to be successful in an
area of life, but the Ct has no goals in that area, or if a goal was set it
would be in conflict with other goals already set in/on that level. This is
akin to knowing you "should" or "could" do "it" but you don't.
However the "Break in the Loop" is what I am looking for and it could be
anywhere. The person may have a very obtainable goal. But, the Ct doesn't
know what to do about it or what to do first.
These are the things I look for:
1) Reference Signals a.k.a. goals, wants, needs, desires and intentions.
2) Perceptions - how and what they consider important things to control for.
3) The comparisons they may make between the two. (e.g. are they making
reasonable comparisons?)
4) Output -- Do they have a plan(s) of action and are they capable of acting
on it - is the plan reasonable, are they likely to change, or control for the
perception they wish.
Depending on the person the problem could be in any one of these 4 areas. If
I am lucky it is just one area, but it is possible to have trouble in all 4
areas.
In a message dated 97-12-19 18:20:42 EST,
[I would think that a theory which says that human beings are living control
systems would have something to say about the ways in which such systems may
fail, and what is expected to happen behaviorally as a result.]
Some points on this perspective ---
1) "What is expected to happen behaviorally?"
This question points to the heart of the misperceptions of PCT; A control
System ONLY Controls Input not Output (behavior). Behavior is NEVER- EVER
-NOT EVEN A LITTLE BIT- correlated with a controlled Perception (e.g. the
desired state.) Behaviors (Actions) are NEVER predicted/expected by knowing
anything about a Reference Signal, perception, comparator, output function or
disturbance. To predict anything you MUST consider ALL these components
SIMULTANEOUSLY. PCT is BASED on Circular Causation; it is NOT a linear.
(Don't stick a FLAT peg in a ROUND hole).
2) Would the theory, which says that human beings are living control systems,
have something to say about the ways in which such systems may fail?
YES it would and does here it is, Keeping the "theory" in mind a control
systems has these basic components
1) Reference Signal
2) Perception
3) Comparator
4) Output
When I referred to "chasing the problem around the loop" 1 2 3 or all 4 of
these components could FAIL causing the whole system to fail -- if one of the
components fail the whole system gets screwed up.
After all this is called control SYSTEMS theory not control COMPONENT theory
EXAMPLE of reference signal failure
Your driving a car, all of a sudden a psychiatrist pops out of the back seat.
He has 2 steal paddles, he quickly places one on each of your ears 200 jewels
of electricity jolt your brain. Suddenly you feel different. This ECT
treatment has "knocked" out many of your higher order reference signals as
On a more real life problem -- what if you looked at Cancer as a control
system gone bad. What component(s) would you guess went bad?
I would propose the same technique, "chase the problem around the loop" for
what ever is causing the poor control -- is there a gene not sensing the
division, or quantity, "we don't need more T-cells, we have plenty"; or is it
the reference --- saying "make more, make more, My God we are running out of
white blood cells."
How a systems fails vary greatly, depending on what is being controlled and
what component(s) fail. A system could end up producing too much or not
enough depending on which direction and which component(s) fail.
1) MOL has helped you find out what level(s) you need to focus on.
2) MOC helps Identify inter-level, intra-level conflicts as well as breaks in
the control processes
This is the last part of the circle of counseling "Closing the Loop of
Counseling"
Now you are ready to come up with a plan to correct the problems of control
you have identified and localized using the MOL and MOC.
Once, you have come up with a PCT based plan, implement it, try it right wrong
or indifferent, you won't know until you put it into action, and try to
control for the desired perception. If the plan is making progress toward
your goal keep it up. If is taking you further from your goal stop what you
are doing, and go the opposite way. If you can do that or what you are doing
is having no effect on the controlled perception, reorganize using the MOL and
MOC to come up with a new plan for controlling for the desired perception.
Trying to keep talk'n the talk and walk'n the walk - in PCT
Mark Lazare
ยทยทยท
to: Who am I, Where am I going, how long have I been in this car.