from [ Marc Abrams (990724.1208) ]
To follow up an earlier request from Isaac. Anything doing at the CSG
Conference?
Marc
from [Kenny Kitzke (990726.1230EDT) ]
<Marc Abrams (990724.1208)>
<To follow up an earlier request from Isaac. Anything doing at the CSG
Conference?>
For the benefit of Marc and Isaac, I have returned from attending both the
MOL and CSG conference. Nothing is doing now, since it is over.
With regard to what happened, I assume everyone who did not attend knows that
Dag Forssell video tapes the conference. It is all available from him for a
rather modest fee. Could be a good investment for you. But, then, how could
I possibly know? 
The room I stayed in did not have an operational phone jack. You had to go
to a "business office" to get wired. There was a surcharge as well from AOL.
The old laptop I took there seemed so slow compared to my desktop, it was a
pain to even go online. I quickly scanned or downloaded my business and
personal mail; then Quit. Did not follow anything that was on CSGNet while I
was away. I made available a paper on Human Nature, but did not present it
as it was just a think piece and I did not really have anything to present
concerning it.
I also paid almost no attention to the outside world of news. No TV,
newspapers, etc., for about a week. It seems the world continued pretty well
without me trying to control or coerce it. Good chance the meeting will
be in the East next year and we'll see more of your pretty faces live and on
Memorex.
Kenny
i.kurtzer (990726.1330)
>From [Kenny Kitzke (990726.1230EDT) ]
could you give a brief synopsis of the events?
thanks
i.
In a message dated 7/26/99 1:47:24 PM, kurtzer@BRANDEIS.EDU writes:
<< i.kurtzer (990726.1330) >>
from [Kenny Kitzke (990726.1630EDT) ]
<could you give a brief synopsis of the events?>
I certainly could; but I have piles of stuff to do having been away a week.
That is why I suggested the tapes if there is interest.
Perhaps others have their notes on disc or at least the list of the topics
and presenters on one sheet that they could ring up easily? Or, perhaps it
would be something our officers could consider doing for the CSG corporation
membership?
All I know is a water leak developed that put two of our commodes out of
commission and that s____ takes precedence over the CSG Conference s___, at
least in my wife's eyes.
Sorry. 8-(
Kenny
[From Bruce Abbott (970810.1000 EST)]
Bill, now that the CSG annual conference is over, and while things are still
fresh in mind, how about providing for those of us who were unable to attend
a brief summary of the proceedings. How many attended? Who was there, from
where? Were there any formal presentations given? If so, what were they
about? What seemed to be the issues that were uppermost in the discussions?
Regards,
Bruce
[From Bruce Abbott (970810.1950 EST)]
Rick Marken (970810.1500) --
Bruce Abbott (970810.1000 EST)
Bill, now that the CSG annual conference is over, and while
things are still fresh in mind, how about providing for those
of us who were unable to attend a brief summary of the
proceedings...What seemed to be the issues that were uppermost
in the discussions?
The conference was _great_, by the way. We had a small but
very international group (Germany, England, Ireland, Australia,
Canada) and the presentations were uniformly excellent.
That's _it_? The conference was great and the presentations were excellent?
"A good time was had by all" is the sort of thing people say who weren't
there but are sure it must have been a nice party. Given the complete lack
of detail, I'm not convinced that Rick got there before it was over.
Here are some details I'd like to hear about: Who attended? How many were
there? In what _ways_ was it great? Who presented, what were the
presentations about, and what was said? What did discussions center on?
Was anything resolved in those discussions, any plans made for the future?
Ah, well, I'm sure Bill will be more informative. Bill, the stage is yours.
Regards,
Bruce
[From Rick Marken (970810.1500)]
Bruce Abbott (970810.1000 EST)--
Bill, now that the CSG annual conference is over, and while
things are still fresh in mind, how about providing for those
of us who were unable to attend a brief summary of the
proceedings...What seemed to be the issues that were uppermost
in the discussions?
One of the issues that was uppermost in the discussions was the
question of why a (supposed) fan of PCT, who manages to find the
time to post criticism of PCT to CSGNet from 8/6 to 8/10, cannot
find the time to attend the only conference in the world where
PCT is not completely ignored.
The conference was _great_, by the way. We had a small but
very international group (Germany, England, Ireland, Australia,
Canada) and the presentations were uniformly excellent.
Best
Rick
···
--
Richard S. Marken Phone or Fax: 310 474-0313
Life Learning Associates e-mail: rmarken@earthlink.net
http://home.earthlink.net/~rmarken/
[From Bill Powers (970811.0538 MDT)]
Bruce Abbott (970810.1000 EST)--
Bill, now that the CSG annual conference is over, and while things are still
fresh in mind, how about providing for those of us who were unable to attend
a brief summary of the proceedings. How many attended? Who was there, from
where? Were there any formal presentations given? If so, what were they
about? What seemed to be the issues that were uppermost in the discussions?
The meeting convened on the evening of Wednesday, Aug. 6, when as usual we
asked who wanted to present materials or ideas, and then set up the
schedule for the rest of the session. There were 25 people in attendance.
There were 7 people from outside the U.S.
On Thursday morning, Wolfgang Zocher opened the proceedings by describing
his work toward a model of human oculomotor control systems. His very
simple model, run on a _real_ analog computer, was able to generate curves
of muscle force versus off-axis fixation angle that closely fit observed
values. The model also demonstrates pursuit tracking of visual targets
(with the visual information being assumed rather than generated by a real
model of vision, alas, the same problem we all face). The work continues.
Isaac Kurtzer then discussed two topics. The first was his Master's thesis
work on using the Test for the Controlled Variable to investigate the
perception of phonemes based on two formants. One formant was picked
randomly from one range, and the subject used a control handle to vary the
frequency of the second (higher) formant to produce a net sound perceived
as "eee". Instead of a straight-line relationship as predicted by the
theory of formant ratios, he found a fairly sharply defined blob on the
plot within which all combinations were perceived as the same sound. Isacc
pointed out that while one could draw a straight loine through the blob,
the straight line was not a "fact": the blob was the "ontological fact."
The second part of his presentation was an intriguing approach to
differentiating levels of perception in a hierarchy. The basic appeal was
to direct observation. For example, some perceptions such as cat, book,
piece of paper, and so on are interchangeable in descriptions of
relationships: cat on paper, paper on cat, book on cat, paper on book, and
so forth. However, "on" is not interchangeable with "cat" (or the others)
in any context. It is of a different class. He did a similar thing with
sequence perceptions.
For the rest of this summary, the exact ordering is not guaranteed, as my
memory is cluttered with all the running around that had to be done to
compensate for missing equipment and facilities (like a live phone jack)
that I had to cope with during coffee breaks and between sessions.
On Thursday evening, Wolfgang demonstrated the capabilities of his new
version of an analog computer implemented on a digital computer (in
progress - 2 to 3 months still to go for the final version). This is a
graphics-oriented version of Simcon, called SIMPCT, in which functional
blocks can be placed on the screen, given parameter settings, and connected
to other blocks by drawing lines. User-defined blocks can be included.
Plots are generated simply by checking off which variables are to be shown.
During the session, several suggestions were offered, for example a
provision to designate groups of blocks to be named and represented as a
single block, so that very complex setups could be reduced to simpler ones
that will fit on a single screen. Among Wolfgang's plans is the provision
of slider controls that can vary parameters while a simulation is running
at many repetitions per second, so the effects can be directly visualized.
The program automatically generates script files that can be sent over the
internet to permit computing setups to be transmitted to others who are
running SIMPCT. Even non-modelers will be able to see the results and
experiment with parameter changes. This should be not only a terrific
research tool, but a powerful teaching tool.
Rick Marken then showed his Java demos directly on the Internet --
unfortunately on my computer which runs them rather slowly. He explained
and demonstrated the ideas behind several of the main programs, especially
his "theme song" of mind-reading.
I then showed the Little Man with the Artificial Cerebellum installed in
it, demonstrating how the Little Man starts out with essentially no control
ability and gradually becomes skillful at tracking a randomly-moving
target. The "learning" takes place at the second kinesthetic level of
control (not at the visual level!). After that, I showed the reorganization
program that we have seen on the net, in which both input and output
constants are adjusted by reorganization to give a simple control system
increasingly good control over a simple environment. I explained that
having bitten off more than I could chew, I was starting over with the
simplest possible case.
To conclude the evening's festivities and prepare for the next morning's
session, Ed Ford showed a video in which two special-education teachers
discussed their application of Ed's program to children of ages 3 through 8
(between the two teachers). These children include non-verbal, handicapped,
brain-damaged, and autistic children who have been spit out of the system
and essentially abandoned. According to these two teachers, discipline is
no longer a problem, and more important these children are learning both
social skills and individual skills -- some of them even learning to read
and write, which had been declared impossible by their former "teachers."
Tom Bourbon said that this application of Ed Ford's program to special
education is going to explode, because of the utter lack of success in any
other programs meant to help such children.
On Friday morning, Ed Ford reviewed the rationale and methods behind his
Responsible Thinking Program. Mark Hamil discussed his applications of the RTP
program (in the Amarillo, TX school system) to special classrooms where
children with the worst behavioral problems are sent. These "BAC" rooms (I
forget what the initials mean) had been run on a "level" system, with
points being earned to progress through the levels and various punishments
used (including a padded solitary-confinement "time-out" room) to ensure
discipline. Of the 150 to 175 children returned to the main system (over
several years) from these rooms, the recidivism rate was ONE HUNDRED
PERCENT. In children released from the BAC rooms administered by Mark Hamil
under the RTP program, the recidivism rate so far is zero.
Joe Sierczinga, reporting on the school in Michigan where he is principal,
gave us a number of horror stories about what happens to a successful
discipline program in the midst of a system where other programs are also
used. His best story concerned his own child who was put into a
behavior-mod token system. Joe made a deal with his child: try your best,
but don't spend any of the tokens. After a considerable number of tokens
had been accumulated, the kid then became an entrepreneur and started
trading the tokens to other children to perform little services, like doing
his homework for him or sharpening his pencils. Needless to say this
created some outrage from the teacher.
And Tom Bourbon expanded on his reports of successes and problems in
schools using, or trying to use, RTP. The main problem is in getting people
actually to use the program, without falling back on their older methods
that weren't working. Tom and Ed are getting very tough about certifying
schools as real RTP schools.
To finish the morning, Susan Souter of Toronto reported on her work on
alcoholism, and how many theories there were. She was suggesting that PCT
could be used to integrate these basically descriptive "theories." This is
the theme of her PhD work.
Rupert Young then gave us a report on his explorations of computer vision
models. The basic idea is to create histograms of visual information (from
a camera), and then to try to derive position and distance information from
these global representations that can be used as part of a control system
for aiming the camera at a target.
On Friday evening, Kent McCelland reviewed his plan for a paper based on
his previous year's presentation, in which it is shown that individuals in
conflict can still manage to maintain "virtual control" over a common
environmental variable, so that despite moderate conflicts, there can be
cooperation. The motivation is to account for "virtual actors" without
losing the connection between individual characteristics and social
phenomena. This led to a spirited discussion in which Paul Stokes and
several others exhibited (unintentionally) a perfect example of
McClelland's thesis, with considerable conflict over the difference between
social phenomena and PCT analysis of individuals, while maintaining a
common goal of applying PCT. These differences gradually decreased over
succeeding sessions, reaching a fairly low minimum after Tom Bourbon's
presentation on Saturday.
Kent asked for and got suggestions about how to treat various parts of this
paper in progress.
Saturday morning opened with Dag Forsell's talk on levels of explanation.
This was mostly for the benefit of some members whom he felt did not
understand the approach of PCT; the subject matter was familiar to most CSG
members.
The final talk was Tom Bourbon's explanation of his matrix of two-person
experiments. Unfortunately the demonstration was disrupted by some source
of electrical interference which kept it from working properly, and Tom
wisely abandoned his attempt to get this rather pretty concept onto tape
for the record. He summarized the results, showing how experiments with two
persons, two models, person-model combinations, two arms of one person, and
two degrees of freedom in one person, could be done to show any one of six
phenomena, from interference to helping, cooperation, conflict, control,
and counter-control. Interestingly, there are three kinds of situations --
conflict, control, and countercontrol -- that can't be done _deliberately_
by a single person; they occur only in social settings, or by accident.
This greatly interested Paul Stokes, by indicating a possible way to draw
the line between individual and social phenomena, and essentially resolved
the earlier conflict. Neat way to end the meeting.
···
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The next CSG meeting in North America will be held from July 15-19, 1998,
in Vancouver, B.C, Canada. The venue arranged by Autumn Winter will be
wonderful, and the cost will be about the same as that of our usual
meetings, roughly $50 per day plus whatever graft the sponsors can get away
with to help students in the future.
Wolfgang Zocher announced the second European CSG meeting to be held in
Germany in the middle of June, 1998 -- in a castle. Exact dates to be
determined. Costs will be about the same as above. About 12 people have
already indicated that they will come.
I think it's probably OK to say that many former strangers became friends
at this meeting.
Best,
Bill P.
[From Rick Marken (970811.0930 PCT)]
Bill Powers (970811.0538 MDT) --
Thanks. That was an excellent (and, according to my memory,
an accurate) summary of the 1997 CSG meeting.
I would like to propose one possible answer to the question
I asked in my previous post, viz. "why has PCT been completely
ignored by the social and life sciences"? One answer that
seemed to be floating around the meeting (and I think it was
a good one) was "because the social and life sciences don't
really know what a theory is". In PCT we see a theory as a
set of specifications for the components of a _working model_
which, when "run", will exhibit the behavior to be explained.
PCT is this kind of theory. Reinforcement theory, natural
selection theory, Freudian theory, etc. are, apparently, not.
Best
Rick
···
--
Richard S. Marken Phone or Fax: 310 474-0313
Life Learning Associates e-mail: rmarken@earthlink.net
http://home.earthlink.net/~rmarken
[From Bruce Gregory (970811.1330 EDT)]
Rick Marken (970811.0930 PCT)
I would like to propose one possible answer to the question
I asked in my previous post, viz. "why has PCT been completely
ignored by the social and life sciences"? One answer that
seemed to be floating around the meeting (and I think it was
a good one) was "because the social and life sciences don't
really know what a theory is". In PCT we see a theory as a
set of specifications for the components of a _working model_
which, when "run", will exhibit the behavior to be explained.
PCT is this kind of theory. Reinforcement theory, natural
selection theory, Freudian theory, etc. are, apparently, not.
I've been re-reading _Pop Internationism_ by the economist Paul
Krugman. He gives numerous examples of the ability of well known
economists to make statements totally at variance with the
published facts. Apparently the "PCT phenomenon" is not
confined to PCT. In fact, it may be the predominant mode of
human thought!
Bruce
[From Rick Marken (970810.2200)]
Me:
>The conference was _great_
Bruce Abbott (970810.1950 EST)
That's _it_? ...Given the complete lack of detail, I'm not
convinced that Rick got there before it was over.
I don't think there was a _complete_ lack of detail in my post.
You seem to have ignored one of the details I mentioned. You
asked about "the issues that were uppermost in the discussions"
and I mentioned one of them:
One of the issues that was uppermost in the discussions was...
why a (supposed) fan of PCT...cannot find the time to attend
the only conference in the world where PCT is not completely
ignored.
You seem to have a knack for ignoring the parts of my posts
that I consider important. For example, you have never responded
to my oft posted request that you describe research programs
in psychology and biology that are aimed at determining the
variables that are controlled in operant conditioning and
evolution. If reinforcemet theory and natural selection are
negative feedback models then I would have expected a quick
and complete reply; if not, then I would expect no reply. So
far, no reply. Will I get one this time?
Another issue that was (and is always) uppermost at the meeting
was "why has PCT been completely ignored by the social and life
sciences"? This issue was implicit in Wolfgang Zocher's elegant
eye movement model, a control of perception (or force) model
that is much simpler and at least as accurate as the far more
common control of 'output" models; in Issac Kurtzer's vowel
perception study; in Kent McClelland's "emergent social agent"
model; in Tom Bourbon's social interaction models; indeed, in
virtually every paper and talk presented at the meeting the
same issue was "uppermost": why has a model that was first
described in great detail in 1957 (or so) and then made more
accessibe in 1974 (with publication of B:CP) been so completely
ignored in the research literature of the social and life
sciences? Why have there been no studies comparing the reinforcement
to the PCT of operant conditioing? Why no studies comparing the
S-R to the PCT model of reflexes? Why no studies comparing any
theory to PCT?
I'd be interested in your ideas about this, Bruce.
Best
Rick
···
--
Richard S. Marken Phone or Fax: 310 474-0313
Life Learning Associates e-mail: rmarken@earthlink.net
http://home.earthlink.net/~rmarken/
[From Bruce Gregory (970811.1405 EDT)]
A suggested demo for Rick's page.
http://junior.apk.net/~jbarta/idiot/idiot.html
Bruce
[From Rick Marken (970811.1230)]
Bruce Gregory (970811.1405 EDT) --
A suggested demo for Rick's page.
Great tip! It kept this idiot busy for well over two minutes;-)
I think it actually would make a great addition to the demos
as a demonstration of reorganization. It is possible to control
the position of the "press" button but it takes some time to
learn how to do it and during that time you can think about
how you are reorganizing.
By the way. I made a resolution some time ago not to use the
word "idiot" or any of its cognates (idiotic, idiocy, etc) in
my posts. I hope that this post does not count as breaking that
resolution. After all, I made the resolution in order to keep
from calling (or seeming to be calling) anyone an idiot. I did
call myself an idiot in this post but I think doing that is
like committing suicide; everyone should be free to do it
unless it's against their religion 
Best
Rick
···
--
Richard S. Marken Phone or Fax: 310 474-0313
Life Learning Associates e-mail: rmarken@earthlink.net
http://home.earthlink.net/~rmarken
Good morning!
I hope everyone has been enjoying the holidays…
I’m going to start the new year freshly invigorated and work on tightening up plans for our conference in August. It appears there might be some time conflicts so I’m looking for input as to whether August 9 through 13 might work better. We have the option to move our dates either prior to or after the original weekend which was going to begin August 2nd. There are some leaning toward the later date, starting August 9th.
Once I get that nailed down, I’ll be able to polish up a presentation for our board members, to host a productive and lively meeting in 2017.
Here’s to a new year full of hope, understanding, and progress!
*barb
Hi Barb
Happy New Year to you and everyone (except those who voted for Trump; they may be living control systems but I really don’t care for the system concepts they are controlling for). I hope to be able to come to the conference any time you have it. It all depends on whether Chicago is still there.
Best regards
Rick
···
On Sat, Dec 31, 2016 at 7:55 AM, bara0361@gmail.com bara0361@gmail.com wrote:
Good morning!
I hope everyone has been enjoying the holidays…
I’m going to start the new year freshly invigorated and work on tightening up plans for our conference in August. It appears there might be some time conflicts so I’m looking for input as to whether August 9 through 13 might work better. We have the option to move our dates either prior to or after the original weekend which was going to begin August 2nd. There are some leaning toward the later date, starting August 9th.
Once I get that nailed down, I’ll be able to polish up a presentation for our board members, to host a productive and lively meeting in 2017.
Here’s to a new year full of hope, understanding, and progress!
*barb
–
Richard S. Marken
“The childhood of the human race is far from over. We
have a long way to go before most people will understand that what they do for
others is just as important to their well-being as what they do for
themselves.” – William T. Powers
Hi Barb.
Whenever you decide I’ll be there. Thanks for keeping things going. I’ve been thinking of calling you. Is there a good time and telephone number to do so perhaps next week?
Wishing you the best for 2017.
Fred
···
On Sat, Dec 31, 2016 at 10:55 AM, bara0361@gmail.com bara0361@gmail.com wrote:
Good morning!
I hope everyone has been enjoying the holidays…
I’m going to start the new year freshly invigorated and work on tightening up plans for our conference in August. It appears there might be some time conflicts so I’m looking for input as to whether August 9 through 13 might work better. We have the option to move our dates either prior to or after the original weekend which was going to begin August 2nd. There are some leaning toward the later date, starting August 9th.
Once I get that nailed down, I’ll be able to polish up a presentation for our board members, to host a productive and lively meeting in 2017.
Here’s to a new year full of hope, understanding, and progress!
*barb