Cooperation

CSGnet Archive CSG1994
21

RM: What I am hoping for is a verbal description (or,better, a diagram) of a PCT model of two people lifting a couch. You don’t even have to model moving the couch; let’s just see what’s involved in cooperatively lifting it.

HB :

Maybe until Kent will find time to »work on it«, you could read his article : The collective control of perceptions:

constructing order from conflict (2004)

Best,

Boris

···

From: csgnet-request@lists.illinois.edu [mailto:csgnet-request@lists.illinois.edu] On Behalf Of “McClelland, Kent” (MCCLEL@Grinnell.EDU via csgnet Mailing List)
Sent: Saturday, December 06, 2014 10:20 PM
To: rsmarken@gmail.com
Cc: csgnet@lists.illinois.edu
Subject: Re: Cooperation

Yes, I’d be interested in seeing that model, too. Unfortunately, I don’t have time to work on it myself at the moment.

Kent

On Dec 6, 2014, at 2:51 PM, Richard Marken wrote:

[From Rick Marken (2014.12.06.1250)]

On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 8:28 PM, Mike Mermel mmermel@mikemermel.com wrote:

RM: Great to hear from you Mike!

MM: I’m sure this is adding complexity when you seem to be looking for simplicity, but my way of controlling my own perception of getting my friend’s couch moved might be to kick in twenty bucks to hire some movers.

RM: It’s not so much adding complexity as going outside the constraints of the problem. Here’s a restatement of the problem:

It takes two people to lift a couch so you and the friend have to do it together – you have to cooperate in order to produce the desired result: the couch lifted and moved from here to there. So how is this cooperative result achieved, according to PCT?

RM: What I am hoping for is a verbal description (or,better, a diagram) of a PCT model of two people lifting a couch. You don’t even have to model moving the couch; let’s just see what’s involved in cooperatively lifting it.

MM: Can two people (control systems) really share a perception in the way you have described?

RM: I think this is a very good point. Two people are looking at the situation from different locations so right there their low level perceptions have to be different. But their perception at a higher level could definitely be the same. For example, if the couch is to be moved “next to the lamp” then both of the friends can perceive the same relationship (couch beside lamp) even if the components of that perception (the lamp and couch) look different from each of their perspectives.

Fred Nickols (2014.12.06.0840 EST)–

FN: First, the from here to there bit. It’s always been the case that the two of us knew where the couch was going. Whether our references were exactly the same or not I think they were close enough for government work…

FN: In short, I think we were able to cooperate because (a) we had very similar understandings of what was or would be involved and (2) we were willing to undertake the task.

FN: Don’t know if this is what you were looking for or not.

RM: Not quite. I want to see how you would actually model the situation using a PCT model. And I would like you to do it for what seems to me the simplest possible case of cooperation: where two systems are needed to produce a result that both want: a lifted couch. That is, describe how two control systems that both want a couch lifted would get this to happen.

Martin Taylor (2014.12.06.10.22)–

MT: As Fred said, there are two separate issues here.

MT: Firstly each of them must perceive that the other controls a perception of where the couch is to go and that the reference values for their perceptions corresponds to much the same place in the environment. There are protocols for getting to this state [Martin Taylor 2014.11.26.16.45].

RM: Again, let’s simplify this by assuming that both people know what perception is to be produced – a lifted couch – and that both are willing to contribute to producing this result.

MT: Secondly, the interesting question is how they coordinate their lifting and moving actions at the lower levels to reduce the error in the “couch-location” relationship perceptions.

RM: Yes, that’s what I want to see a model of!

MT: Didn’t Tom Bourbon do some modelling of this situation with four people carrying a table, or some such, a long time ago? Do you know if the results are anywhere accessible? Or is my memory at fault?

RM: I think you are right. I think he reported it at a meeting, though. I don’t think it’s described in any of Tom’s published papers. However, Tom’s work on two-person interaction is definitely relevant to the question of how people cooperate. I think the answer to my question could certainly be gleaned from Tom’s models of two-person interaction. And from Kent’s as well. Indeed, what I’m looking for is a model along the lines of those developed by Tom and Kent.

Best regards

Rick

–

Richard S. Marken, Ph.D.
Author of Doing Research on Purpose.

Now available from Amazon or Barnes & Noble

In nature there’s no blemish but the mind

None can be called deformed but the unkind.

Shakespeare, Twelfth Night

22

Cooperation
from a PCT View

David Goldstein (2014.12.7.0843)

Problem statement: It takes two people to lift a couch so you and the friend
have to do it together – you have to cooperate in order to produce the desired
result: the couch lifted and moved from here to there. So how is this
cooperative result achieved, according to PCT?

Person A asks person B to
help him do the above.

Person B says: Sorry, I
have back problems and shouldn’t be lifting something that heavy. (No conflict
exists)

Person A asks person C to
help him do the above.

Person C says: Sorry, who
are you and why should I help you? (There usually has to be a social
relationship between two people who are cooperating. It would be hard to get a
stranger to do this, without paying the stranger).

Person A asks person D to
help him do the above. Person D says: OK
friend. Tell me what to do.

Person A takes the lead
and says: I am going to count to three. On three, lift the couch up at the ends.
Watch where I am putting my hands and
you do the same.

After this step is
accomplished, Person A takes a side step towards the desired location. Person A
says: Now you do the same until we are face to face with each other again. This
step is repeated until the couch is close to the desired location.

Person A says: On the
count of three, put the couch down.

Person A says: Now we
will push the couch on the floor so that it is against the wall. Watch where I position
myself and put my hands. This step is accomplished.

Person A thanks person D
for the help. Person D says: Glad I could help.

[From Rick Marken (2014.12.06.1250)]

RM: Great to hear from you Mike!

MM: I’m sure this is adding complexity when you seem to be looking for simplicity, but my way of controlling my own perception of getting my friend’s couch moved might be to kick in twenty bucks to hire some movers.

RM: It’s not so much adding complexity as going outside the constraints of the problem. Here’s a restatement of the problem:

It takes two people to lift a couch so you and the friend have to do it together – you have to cooperate in order to produce the desired result: the couch lifted and moved from here to there. So how is this cooperative result achieved, according to PCT?

RM: What I am hoping for is a verbal description (or,better, a diagram) of a PCT model of two people lifting a couch. You don’t even have to model moving the couch; let’s just see what’s involved in cooperatively lifting it.

MM: Can two people (control systems) really share a perception in the way you have described?

RM: I think this is a very good point. Two people are looking at the situation from different locations so right there their low level perceptions have to be different. But their perception at a higher level could definitely be the same. For example, if the couch is to be moved “next to the lamp” then both of the friends can perceive the same relationship (couch beside lamp) even if the components of that perception (the lamp and couch) look different from each of their perspectives.

Fred Nickols (2014.12.06.0840 EST)–

FN: First, the from here to there bit. It’s always been the case that the two of us knew where the couch was going. Whether our references were exactly the same or not I think they were close enough for government work…

FN: In short, I think we were able to cooperate because (a) we had very similar understandings of what was or would be involved and (2) we were willing to undertake the task.

FN: Don’t know if this is what you were looking for or not.

RM: Not quite. I want to see how you would actually model the situation using a PCT model. And I would like you to do it for what seems to me the simplest possible case of cooperation: where two systems are needed to produce a result that both want: a lifted couch. That is, describe how two control systems that both want a couch lifted would get this to happen.

Martin Taylor (2014.12.06.10.22)–

MT: As Fred said, there are two separate issues here.

MT: Firstly each of them must perceive that the other controls a perception of where the couch is to go and that the reference values for their perceptions corresponds to much the same place in the environment. There are protocols for getting to this state [Martin Taylor 2014.11.26.16.45].

RM: Again, let’s simplify this by assuming that both people know what perception is to be produced – a lifted couch – and that both are willing to contribute to producing this result.

MT: Secondly, the interesting question is how they coordinate their lifting and moving actions at the lower levels to reduce the error in the “couch-location” relationship perceptions.

RM: Yes, that’s what I want to see a model of!

MT: Didn’t Tom Bourbon do some modelling of this situation with four people carrying a table, or some such, a long time ago? Do you know if the results are anywhere accessible? Or is my memory at fault?

RM: I think you are right. I think he reported it at a meeting, though. I don’t think it’s described in any of Tom’s published papers. However, Tom’s work on two-person interaction is definitely relevant to the question of how people cooperate. I think the answer to my question could certainly be gleaned from Tom’s models of two-person interaction. And from Kent’s as well. Indeed, what I’m looking for is a model along the lines of those developed by Tom and Kent.

Best regards

Rick

···

On Saturday, December 6, 2014 3:51 PM, Richard Marken csgnet@lists.illinois.edu wrote:
On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 8:28 PM, Mike Mermel mmermel@mikemermel.com wrote:

–
Richard S. Marken, Ph.D.
Author of Doing Research on Purpose.
Now available from Amazon or Barnes & Noble

In nature there’s no blemish but the mind

None can be called deformed but the unkind.

Shakespeare, Twelfth Night

23

Phil 1/7

easy. I could answer this question in < 10 words…

24

[Martin Taylor 2014.12.07.11.59]

···

On 2014/12/7 11:44 AM, PHILIP JERAIR YERANOSIAN (pyeranos@ucla.edu via csgnet Mailing List) wrote:

Phil 1/7

easy. I could answer this question in < 10 words...

Do you intend to do so?

Martin

25

that’s a good question. ya. I thought about the couch problem for a couple minutes and the answer was automatically apparent. I still haven’t intended to go about a more complete and involved synthesis.

but I know you’re not talking about me knowing the answer; you’re talking about me telling you the answer

···
26

[From Rick Marken (2014.12.07.1010)]

···

On Sun, Dec 7, 2014 at 1:19 AM, “Boris Hartman” csgnet@lists.illinois.edu wrote:

RM: What I am hoping for is a verbal description (or,better, a diagram) of a PCT model of two people lifting a couch. You don’t even have to model moving the couch; let’s just see what’s involved in cooperatively lifting it.

HB :

Maybe until Kent will find time to »work on it«, you could read his article : The collective control of perceptions: constructing order from conflict (2004)

RM: Yes, that paper is a good start. It certainly shows how two control systems can work together to control the same variable. But I don’t think we have to wait for Kent on this; he’s described his model very clearly. So now you should be able to use Kent’s model as the basis for modeling the situation I described; cooperatively lifting a couch.

RM: By the way, I don’t like tooting my own horn but I think I’ll do it just for the record since I am kind of tired of being treated as though I know nothing about social control – the controlling done by two or more control systems when those control systems are in different organisms.

RM: It turns out that I am actually the father of research on social control. It started with the work described in Marken,
R. S. (1986) Perceptual Organization of Behavior: A Hierarchical Control Model of Coordinated Action. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human
Perception & Performance, 12, 67 - 76, which is reprinted in “Mind Readings” starting on p. 159. This work was done on an old Commodore 64 which came with two “game paddles”. The variables in that experiment were controlled by by a singe subject moving the two game paddles appropriately; that is, using both the left and right hand.

RM: That research was actually done back in 1983-84, while I was still in Minnesota. At that time I had a phone conversation with Tom Bourbon who was trying to figure out where he should go next on his PCT research. I suggested that he replicate my two handed control studies with two different people rather than two hands of the same person holding each game paddle. And the rest is history.

RM: Tom ran with the idea and did some wonderful studies of two -person (social) control, some of which are described in his excellent paper in the control theory volume of the journal American Behavioral Scientist (AMS) that I edited back in 1990 (Bourbon, T. (1990) Interaction of Control Systems, ABS,34, 95-105) . Tom never acknowledged my having given him the idea for the research and I never thought he needed to. I was happy that he had found a nice research niche in PCT. But I mention it now because, as I said, I’m tired of been treated as though I know nothing about social control. I was actually studying social control by modeling the controlling done by interacting control systems well before Powers’ theory was even a gleam in most of your eyes.

So there;-)

Best

Rick

–

Richard S. Marken, Ph.D.
Author of Doing Research on Purpose.
Now available from Amazon or Barnes & Noble

In nature there’s no blemish but the mind

None can be called deformed but the unkind.

Shakespeare, Twelfth Night

27

[From Rick Marken (2014.12.07.1020)]

···

David Goldstein (2014.12.7.0843)

RM: OK, now we’re getting somewhere.

Person A asks person B to
help him do the above…

RM: I think we can start with the two people already having agreed to lift the couch together. All I want to see is a control theory model of two control systems cooperatively lifting the couch. It’s just the lifting I want to see modeled, at least at first. I think just producing a model of this simple result will tell us a lot about what is involved in cooperative control.

DG: Person A takes the lead
and says: I am going to count to three. On three, lift the couch up at the ends.

RM: This is where I think you’ve hit pay dirt. You have to consider why one of the two cooperating people has to do this when building a model of cooperative lifting the couch. So now go forth and try to develop a control model of the situation.

Best

Rick

–

Richard S. Marken, Ph.D.
Author of Doing Research on Purpose.
Now available from Amazon or Barnes & Noble

In nature there’s no blemish but the mind

None can be called deformed but the unkind.

Shakespeare, Twelfth Night

28

Rick, what’re all these words for?
it’s an easy question, just do it already.

draw a free body diagram of the table and draw the forces. you’ll see that in order to do the lift, both systems need to apply forces to control accelerations and torques.

29

[From Rick Marken (2014.12.07.1040)]

···

On Sun, Dec 7, 2014 at 10:24 AM, PHILIP JERAIR YERANOSIAN pyeranos@ucla.edu wrote:

PY: Rick, what’re all these words for?
it’s an easy question, just do it already.

draw a free body diagram of the table and draw the forces. you’ll see that in order to do the lift, both systems need to apply forces to control accelerations and torques.

RM: I am trying to get other people to see what’s involved in developing a control model, and, in particular, a control model of cooperation. I’m trying to make this a learning experience. You have got part of the solution to the modeling problem with you free body diagram; the model has to include a representation of the physical situation. And you can surely model that aspect of things better than I can. The free body diagram you describe is the physical part of the model I want; it shows the forces required to lift the object. But it don’t show how the object is lifted; it leaved out the lifters – the control systems that have to apply the forces properly to get it lifted.

RM: So I think it would be great if you could post the free body diagram of a couch (or table) to show the variables that would be involved in lifting it. Then half the model would be completed. That would be a really nice contribution Phil.

Best

Rick

Richard S. Marken, Ph.D.
Author of Doing Research on Purpose.
Now available from Amazon or Barnes & Noble

In nature there’s no blemish but the mind

None can be called deformed but the unkind.

Shakespeare, Twelfth Night

30

yea, the FBD is really easy. I could do it in 1 sec. what I really want to do is the modeling part. I wanted to meet with you to take a look at your computer codes and help you out with that. but you said no, so you should reorganize your schedule

···

On Sun, Dec 7, 2014 at 10:24 AM, PHILIP JERAIR YERANOSIAN pyeranos@ucla.edu wrote:

PY: Rick, what’re all these words for?
it’s an easy question, just do it already.

draw a free body diagram of the table and draw the forces. you’ll see that in order to do the lift, both systems need to apply forces to control accelerations and torques.

RM: I am trying to get other people to see what’s involved in developing a control model, and, in particular, a control model of cooperation. I’m trying to make this a learning experience. You have got part of the solution to the modeling problem with you free body diagram; the model has to include a representation of the physical situation. And you can surely model that aspect of things better than I can. The free body diagram you describe is the physical part of the model I want; it shows the forces required to lift the object. But it don’t show how the object is lifted; it leaved out the lifters – the control systems that have to apply the forces properly to get it lifted.

RM: So I think it would be great if you could post the free body diagram of a couch (or table) to show the variables that would be involved in lifting it. Then half the model would be completed. That would be a really nice contribution Phil.

Best

Rick

Richard S. Marken, Ph.D.
Author of Doing Research on Purpose.
Now available from Amazon or Barnes & Noble

In nature there’s no blemish but the mind

None can be called deformed but the unkind.

Shakespeare, Twelfth Night

31

[From Rick Marken (2014.12.07.1100)]

···

On Sun, Dec 7, 2014 at 10:45 AM, PHILIP JERAIR YERANOSIAN pyeranos@ucla.edu wrote:

PY: yea, the FBD is really easy. I could do it in 1 sec. what I really want to do is the modeling part. I wanted to meet with you to take a look at your computer codes and help you out with that. but you said no, so you should reorganize your schedule

RM: I might be able to arrange a personal meeting but this time of year is particularly difficult. But besides scheduling problems, the main reason I am reluctant to meet you in person is that I would like whatever I can contribute in terms of understanding PCT to go out to as large an audience as possible.

RM: I know it is possible to accomplish things with personal meetings that are difficult to accomplish in group settings (including the internet). But I believe that I (actually we) could contribute more to an understanding of PCT by doing whatever work we do over the internet so that it’s available to other interested parties. That includes developing code, even. It’s an enormous efficiency to me, given the limited time I have to devote to working on developing PCT.

RM: I think I get more purchase, in terms of teaching output per unit time, from doing much of my PCT work on the internet than I do from one on one sessions. I will do one on one sessions if they are aimed at getting a particular research project completed. But now even my one on one research work is done over the internet.

RM: I think the place for one on one personal interaction regarding PCT is at control theory conferences (as Richard Pfau suggested). Hopefully we will start having those again soon. But until then I think the my preferred place for doing work on PCT – especially work that might be of interest or benefit to many others who are interested in PCT – is on CSGNet.

Best

Rick

–

Richard S. Marken, Ph.D.
Author of Doing Research on Purpose.
Now available from Amazon or Barnes & Noble

In nature there’s no blemish but the mind

None can be called deformed but the unkind.

Shakespeare, Twelfth Night

32

…Rick, were obviously going to open source our code.

I’m sorry but I can’t get any serious work done like this. my theories have considerably deviated from everyones’ here and I’m not on the same page as everybody else.
I don’t think anyone is on my page, but you’re the closest Rick, because you’re in LA. also, I can’t speak to more than you because I’ve read only your book, and I’m highly attuned to the specific problems YOU are trying to solve. so there.

think about this: what are the odds that I’m going to find your book for $3 at anywhere other than the ucla bookstore (btw, it was in the “these books are hardly ever read and we basically need to give these books away section”). So, it doesn’t sound like you’re hitting a very wide audience. cooperate or die, Rick

kind regards

33

[From Rick Marken (2014.12.07.1230)]

···

On Sun, Dec 7, 2014 at 11:17 AM, PHILIP JERAIR YERANOSIAN pyeranos@ucla.edu wrote:

…Rick, were obviously going to open source our code.
I’m sorry but I can’t get any serious work done like this. my theories have considerably deviated from everyones’ here and I’m not on the same page as everybody else.
I don’t think anyone is on my page, but you’re the closest Rick, because you’re in LA. also, I can’t speak to more than you because I’ve read only your book, and I’m highly attuned to the specific problems YOU are trying to solve. so there.

think about this: what are the odds that I’m going to find your book for $3 at anywhere other than the ucla bookstore (btw, it was in the “these books are hardly ever read and we basically need to give these books away section”). So, it doesn’t sound like you’re hitting a very wide audience. cooperate or die, Rick

RM: I found that last remark rather troubling. Could you please explain what you meant.

kind regards

–

Richard S. Marken, Ph.D.
Author of Doing Research on Purpose.
Now available from Amazon or Barnes & Noble

In nature there’s no blemish but the mind

None can be called deformed but the unkind.

Shakespeare, Twelfth Night

34

the 13 colonies

···

On Sun, Dec 7, 2014 at 11:17 AM, PHILIP JERAIR YERANOSIAN pyeranos@ucla.edu wrote:

…Rick, were obviously going to open source our code.
I’m sorry but I can’t get any serious work done like this. my theories have considerably deviated from everyones’ here and I’m not on the same page as everybody else.
I don’t think anyone is on my page, but you’re the closest Rick, because you’re in LA. also, I can’t speak to more than you because I’ve read only your book, and I’m highly attuned to the specific problems YOU are trying to solve. so there.

think about this: what are the odds that I’m going to find your book for $3 at anywhere other than the ucla bookstore (btw, it was in the “these books are hardly ever read and we basically need to give these books away section”). So, it doesn’t sound like you’re hitting a very wide audience. cooperate or die, Rick

RM: I found that last remark rather troubling. Could you please explain what you meant.

kind regards

–
Richard S. Marken, Ph.D.
Author of Doing Research on Purpose.
Now available from Amazon or Barnes & Noble

In nature there’s no blemish but the mind

None can be called deformed but the unkind.

Shakespeare, Twelfth Night

35

[From Rick Marken (2014.12.07.1140)]

···

On Sun, Dec 7, 2014 at 11:33 AM, PHILIP JERAIR YERANOSIAN pyeranos@ucla.edu wrote:

the 13 colonies

RM: So who should I cooperate with? And in what sense will I die if I don’t?

Best

Rick

On Sunday, December 7, 2014, Richard Marken csgnet@lists.illinois.edu wrote:

[From Rick Marken (2014.12.07.1230)]

–

On Sun, Dec 7, 2014 at 11:17 AM, PHILIP JERAIR YERANOSIAN pyeranos@ucla.edu wrote:

…Rick, were obviously going to open source our code.
I’m sorry but I can’t get any serious work done like this. my theories have considerably deviated from everyones’ here and I’m not on the same page as everybody else.
I don’t think anyone is on my page, but you’re the closest Rick, because you’re in LA. also, I can’t speak to more than you because I’ve read only your book, and I’m highly attuned to the specific problems YOU are trying to solve. so there.

think about this: what are the odds that I’m going to find your book for $3 at anywhere other than the ucla bookstore (btw, it was in the “these books are hardly ever read and we basically need to give these books away section”). So, it doesn’t sound like you’re hitting a very wide audience. cooperate or die, Rick

RM: I found that last remark rather troubling. Could you please explain what you meant.

kind regards

–
Richard S. Marken, Ph.D.
Author of Doing Research on Purpose.
Now available from Amazon or Barnes & Noble

In nature there’s no blemish but the mind

None can be called deformed but the unkind.

Shakespeare, Twelfth Night

Richard S. Marken, Ph.D.
Author of Doing Research on Purpose.
Now available from Amazon or Barnes & Noble

In nature there’s no blemish but the mind

None can be called deformed but the unkind.

Shakespeare, Twelfth Night

36

[Martin Taylor 2014.12.07.14.37]

  [Martin Taylor 2014.12.07.11.59]

Do you intend to do so?
Martin

Yes, I want you to tell, in <10 words, your understanding of what

each partner is controlling for, how the dynamics works through the
several feedback loops that pass through both partners (e.g. what
prevents, for example, uncontrolled oscillation of the couch while
they are both lifting – is that control of vertical velocity, or
damping in control of position, or what?), and what parameter values
need to be considered.
Martin

···

pyeranos@ucla.edu

    Phil 1/7




    easy. I could answer  this question in < 10 words...

  On 2014/12/7 12:17 PM, PHILIP JERAIR

YERANOSIAN wrote:

  that's a good question. ya. I thought about the couch

problem for a couple minutes and the answer was automatically
apparent. I still haven’t intended to go about a more complete and
involved synthesis.
but I know you’re not talking about me knowing the
answer; you’re talking about me telling you the answer

37

in what sense will you die? old age. cooperate with me and maybe you won’t.

38

bob hintz 2014.12.07.1340

I don’t think you can simply posit language speaking control systems without at least discussing the difference between independent systems controlling a perception of a variable (causal or physical) as opposed to joining with another control system to control that same variable.

I would suggest that when two act as one the output of each reduces the perceived error (difference between couch on floor and couch in the air) in a coordinated fashion. If one is too tall compared to the other that might be a problem. If one lifts too fast compared to the other, it might be a problem. This requires paying attention to the other’s output in relation to the agreed upon reference condition as well as one’s own output and signaling changes.

This becomes more important when they are moving the couch to the designated target location.

bob

···

On Sun, Dec 7, 2014 at 1:33 PM, PHILIP JERAIR YERANOSIAN csgnet@lists.illinois.edu wrote:

the 13 colonies

On Sunday, December 7, 2014, Richard Marken csgnet@lists.illinois.edu wrote:

[From Rick Marken (2014.12.07.1230)]

On Sun, Dec 7, 2014 at 11:17 AM, PHILIP JERAIR YERANOSIAN pyeranos@ucla.edu wrote:

…Rick, were obviously going to open source our code.
I’m sorry but I can’t get any serious work done like this. my theories have considerably deviated from everyones’ here and I’m not on the same page as everybody else.
I don’t think anyone is on my page, but you’re the closest Rick, because you’re in LA. also, I can’t speak to more than you because I’ve read only your book, and I’m highly attuned to the specific problems YOU are trying to solve. so there.

think about this: what are the odds that I’m going to find your book for $3 at anywhere other than the ucla bookstore (btw, it was in the “these books are hardly ever read and we basically need to give these books away section”). So, it doesn’t sound like you’re hitting a very wide audience. cooperate or die, Rick

RM: I found that last remark rather troubling. Could you please explain what you meant.

kind regards

–
Richard S. Marken, Ph.D.
Author of Doing Research on Purpose.
Now available from Amazon or Barnes & Noble

In nature there’s no blemish but the mind

None can be called deformed but the unkind.

Shakespeare, Twelfth Night

39

[From Rick Marken (2014.12.07.1220)]

···

On Sun, Dec 7, 2014 at 11:46 AM, PHILIP JERAIR YERANOSIAN pyeranos@ucla.edu wrote:

in what sense will you die? old age. cooperate with me and maybe you won’t.

RM: I think we can agree that whether or not control of behavior is possible, people don’t like to have other people try to control their behavior. What you are trying to do here is control my behavior by contingency. The behavior you want from me is “cooperation” and the contingency is that if don’t cooperate I’ll die of old age and if I do I won’t – whatever that means. But whatever the contingency is I’ve got to tell you that I do not like it when people try to control my behavior arbitrarily (without taking what I want into account)… And I’m pretty sure you wouldn’t like it is someone did the same to you. So I would appreciate it if you could show a little empathy.

RM: I know that I don’t have a large audience for what I do. But that’s OK with me. I just enjoy doing the best work I can. There are one or two people (possibly more) who do appreciate my work and eventually there may be more. But I’m not in it for fame or fortune or immortality; I just like doing the work with the few colleagues I have.

Best

Rick

–
Richard S. Marken, Ph.D.
Author of Doing Research on Purpose.
Now available from Amazon or Barnes & Noble

In nature there’s no blemish but the mind

None can be called deformed but the unkind.

Shakespeare, Twelfth Night