[From Rick Marken (920522 19:00)]
Well, it looks like the machine is still up so let me
make one quick observation. I think there has been some
confusion about what control theory says about control
and what it says about the processes that might influence
control -- ie. consciousness. This confusion becomes
particularly acute in the discussion of standards (principles)
where there is talk about "setting appropriate standards"
and such. When we talk like this, WHO do we imagine to
be "setting the appropriate standards"? The hierarchical
control model says it is the "higher order systems". The
references for principles are AUTOMATICALLY set by the systems
controlling system concepts. The references for programs are
automatically set by the systems controlling system concepts
and/or principles, etc. The point is that all this varying
of lower level references to control higher level perceptions
is carried out smoothly and automatically by the control
hierarchy. I hate to point this out again, but this process is
nicely illustrated by my hierarchical spreadsheet and (in a
less abstract manner) by Bill's "Little Man". So ordinarily,
there is no external "agent" (other than the control hierarchy
itself) that sets references -- and varies them -- and this
varying happens automatically. This means that principles are
varied AUTOMATICALLY to control system concepts; if the system
concept control systems need to vary the honesty principle
reference to preserve the perception of the system concept, it
DOES it; that's YOU doing it -- but there is no choice going
on; no conscious decision to be a little more or lest honest in
this particular situation. It just happens (just as you muscles
tense automatically to control the position of your limb).
When we talk about a person "setting appropriate standards" I
think we are talking about a phenomenon that is external to
the PCT hierarchy. Subjectively, when I talk to myself and
say "maybe I should try X" it is my consciousness that is
doing this. Consciousness is like something that hovers
over the hierarchy and tinkers with it occasionally; at least,
consciousness is what CAN tinker with the hierarchy.
I think we know a hell of a lot LESS about how consciousness
works (in terms of phenomena and models) then we know about
how hierarchical control works. But I do think that consciousness
(the feeling of having to choose -- "should I do X or Y"?)
only comes up when there is some degree of internal conflict
or lack of "output functions" that can be used to control
the required perceptions. When you are in control you are
rarely conscious of it -- unless you make some effort to
notice how well your hierarchy is working. When there is a
failure of control (due to conflict, lack of skill or insuperable
disturbance) then consciouness is there. As I said in
an earlier post -- moving consciousness to systems that don't
need attending to can create more problems than it might
solve.
Best regards
Rick
···
**************************************************************
Richard S. Marken USMail: 10459 Holman Ave
The Aerospace Corporation Los Angeles, CA 90024
E-mail: marken@aero.org
(310) 336-6214 (day)
(310) 474-0313 (evening)