I’ve read what you wrote Rick. But iyou wrote is RCT again :
Controlled variables in outer environment
Protection from disturbances.
Well you’ll make the heÄ?ll of confussion there. If they will not check it here what nonsense you are capable of producing, they’ll never understand PCT. And you made such a nice Paragraph of PCT :
RM: Yes, and these outputs are varied as the means of influencing the metaphorical environment of perceptual signals that are the basis of the higher level perceptual variables that are being controlled. But ultimately these outputs affect the perceptions controlled by the higher level systems through the non-metaphorical (physical) environment. This is because the perceptual variables at all levels of the control hierarchy – from intensities to system concepts – are a function of this physical environment. So when you are controlling any perceptual variable, whether it’s the loudness of a sound, the honesty of a communication or the degree to which you see yourself as a Dodger fan (how about those Dodgers;-), you are producing outputs that influence the state of that perceptual variable via environment (physical reality) of which that variable is a function.
Did you forget it. It’s not about Â»Controlled variablesÂ« and Â»Control of behaviorÂ«. It’s about Control of perception
From: Richard Marken [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
Sent: Monday, September 11, 2017 1:09 AM
Cc: Richard Marken
Subject: Comment on a blog post on PCT
[From Rick Marken (2017.09.10.1610)]
I receive posts from a blog called Slate Star Codex, which is apparently the project of a psychiatrist named Scott Alexander. I joined a while ago when I was told that there was some talk about PCT. Scott is aware of PCT, sees its relevance to his interests (in science, philosophy, medicine, politics and futurism) and apparently sees merit in it, to a degree. This is reflected in one of his latest posts where he compares PCT to a predictive processing (PP) model of behavior that was apparently featured in a book called “Surfing Uncertainty”. Scott wrote a very nice comparison of PCT and PP, noting that both are control models that contain the idea of a reference specification for a perceptual variable. And he faults PP for not acknowledging that PCT came up with this idea in the first place. But he also faults PCT for coming up with what he considers the almost comical idea that people control things like “love” and “communism”. I wrote a comment to Scott’s post in an attempt to address this concern: I think you will find it here:
If you can get in to the site, you can find my comment by scrolling down (I’m called mindreadings). And you can read Scott’s original comment by scrolling up.
Richard S. Marken
"Perfection is achieved not when you have nothing more to add, but when you
have nothing left to take away.â?
–Antoine de Saint-Exupery