[From Rick Marken (940523.1230)]
Hank Folson (940522) --
The only time that responding to someone's PCT related position by stating
another position, as you did, is useful is if the responding position has
been proven by a model.
Oops. Looks like I'm back to offending again. Sorry, Hank. I didn't mean to
seem dismissive or to avoid dealing with your point. I just didn't understand
your point (which certainly doesn't mean that there was anything wrong with
your point; just that I didn't understand it -- my this is a hot medium).
Anyway, since you repeated your point, let me try again:
We are forced to make allowances as we study people who are independent
living control systems who do not know they are independent living control
systems, AND who think they and those they interact with are stimulus-
response based organisms.
This was the point I did not understand. That doesn't mean that I don't think
it's a good point; I just don't undersdtand it. Why are we forced to make
allowances when we study such people? What allowances? It's just not obvious
to me, that's all. I'm just curious -- not contentious.
I agree with what you say about people, by the way. For example, you say:
The people we study wrongly believe that their goal is to produce some
behavior, and that the people they are interacting with are producing
behaviors that are their goals, and furthermore, these behaviors
interactively stimulate the people involved to change their behaviors....
Furthermore, we have cultural beliefs that we can achieve results that we
do not have direct control over (e.g. make someone do something; reward
good behaviors, etc.).
To further complicate matters, people continue to function as hierarchical
control systems, so they will be controlling their perceptions, regardless
what society has taught them.
I agree with all this; and it's very well said. I just don't see that it
complicates matters for us (people studying people) or require that we "make
allowances" for anything. But just because I don't see your point doesn't
reflect negatively on it; indeed, it may reflect positively. I'm just asking
for clarification.
Best
Rick