From [Marc Abrams (2004.01.10.2332)]
[From Bill Williams 10 January 2003 9:OO PM CST]
[From Bruce Gregory (2004.01.10.2148)]
[From Rick Marken (2004.01.10.1800)]
I'm willing to believe that this is possible -- a fake fight, for
example, looks like a conflict (not to the participants but to the
observers) but isn't -- but I don't see how the literary example shows
this. Maybe I didn't read the article carefully enough. Could you
please explain this.I'm flattered.
But I think Bruce G. is right on and I'll try to explain
why. A PCT conflict only exists when the two parties want the same _exact_
perceptual variable in two different states.
But I think Bruce G. is right on and I'll try to explainThere are two ways why this can be technically correct, but very misleading.
Firstly, the word "only" should be omitted. The more general case is
that there are too few degrees of freedom available for both parties
to control their perceptual variables simultaneously. That could be
because they are both controlling the same function of environmental
variables, but it could also be because they are controlling
different perceptual variables through the same environmental
variable. Those are the simplest "1 for 2" cases of conflict, but the
same principle applies when extended to higher dimensions, and then
conflict can exist without there being any perceptual or
environemntal variables being exactly the same between the systems in
conflict. All that is necessrary is that the loops, together, have
too few degrees of freedom for them to be simultaneously controlled.
The second way that it can be misleading occurs when you want to take
this theoretically correct statement and put it to practical use.
It's a dynamical issue. Although there may be adequate degrees of
freedom for two perceptions to come to their reference level
eventually, yet the actions of each may influence the other so as to
make the settling time very long. Indeed, even if there is a
theoretical possibility of stable coexistence, the combined system of
two control loops could oscillate (in dynamical terms, their joint
behaviour could have a limit cycle as an attractor, in addition to a
fixed point attractor).
What this means is that two systems (now more compex than a single
ECU) could be controlling different perceptions using different
environmental variables, and yet give every appearance of being in
conflict.
Martin