[From Rick Marken (980829.1630)]
Tim Carey (9808300710)
So are you saying that "the pattern of movement of the victim's
finger" equates to "the victim's behaviour"?
Is that what you're thinking of when you say that the victim's
behaviour is being controlled?
If so, what were you meaning when you wrote that sentence in the
foreward of LCS (the relevant bit was: "that living control
systems control and cannot be controlled")? It seems to be at
odds with what you're saying here.
As I said in an earlier post [Rick Marken (980898.1610) -- actually
posted (980827.1610)] what I said in the forward to LCS was _wrong_
[NB. Bruce Gregory (980829.1810)]; living control systems certainly
_can_ be controlled. Apparently you and Bruce Gregory missed the
post where I admitted my error because you just said the above
and Bruce Gregory just wrote:
Bruce Gregory (980829.1648 EDT)
What happened to the Rick who wrote "that living systems control
and cannot be controlled."? We'd all like to see him return.
and Bruce Gregory (980829.1800 EDT)
Look at how misled I was reading your Foreword to _Living Control
So I'll append what I said in my earlier post about my "living
control systems control but can't be controlled" comment in the
LCS forward; it starts right below the dotted line. Please try
to read it this time. I would like to hear what you have to say
It would sure be too bad if you guys have gotten involved with
PCT because of that one (incorrect) phrase of mine. I hope it's
not too late to say "never mind"
This was posted by Rick Marken on (980827.1610)
What I said in the forward is false. It just shows that what
is important is not what people _say_ but how the model _works_.
Just because I said "living control systems control and cannot
be controlled" doesn't make it so.
Of course, I understood the model when I wrote those words. My
only excuse is that I must have been controlling for the punchi-
ness of the prose rather than the accuracy of the semantics.
What I should have said is ""living control systems control and
cannot be controlled _arbitrarily_". You can't get a person to
produce any, arbitrarily selected behavior, even if you are willing
to use coercive force. But you certainly can control _some_
behavior _sometimes_. Control of behavior can be (and is regularly)
done in many different ways: through the use of reward and
punishment, through the use of disturbance to controlled variables,
through deception and through the use of physical force (coercion).
PCT shows what is actually going on when people control behavior
using any of these methods; and it shows the limitations of these
methods. But PCT certainly does _not_ show that living systems
_cannot_ be controlled. Whoever says that (me included) is wrong.
So one of my biggest mistakes (saying that "living control systems
control and cannot be controlled") is now enshrined in print in
one of my favorite books. So? Just because someone (even me;-))
wrote something down in a book doesn't mean it's true -- right?
Richard S. Marken Phone or Fax: 310 474-0313
Life Learning Associates e-mail: email@example.com