[From Rick Marken (2000.09.06.2120 PDT)]
Bill Powers (2000.09.06.1400 MDT)
Dick Robertson (2000.09.06.1735CDT)
Thank you both for those very helpful posts. Bill, I will work on
the program as soon as I can, but I've been busy as heck and I
have vistors this weekend. So who knows? And Dick, the article
on Ira Stoll is a gem. Thanks. I'll write to Stoll soon.
Me:
Welcome, Ray and Merry!
Ray & Merry Bennett reply:
Thanks Rick. I've been lurking for almost a year.
Well, it's nice to finally hear from you. At the end of your
post you ask whether you have "set it up" correctly. I think
you did fine but when you post in the future it would be nice
if you could add a header, like mine above, so it's easier
for readers to tell who's posting. For example, you might put
the following at the top of your next post:
[From Ray Bennett (2000.09.07.0900 MDT)]
if you (rather than Merry) write the post at 9:00 AM Mountain
Daylight Time on Sept 7 of 2000.
I actually wrote on the RTP net and had only one response.
What would you like to talk about?
I want to learn to think and talk in PCT ways to give
respect to others.
I bet you already know how to respect others just fine. PCT can't
teach a person how to respect others. PCT is just a model of
purposeful behavior. Whether or not you respect others is up to
you. I think I understand PCT pretty well and, yet, there are
still a few people (not many) for whom I have no respect.
I've met behaviorists who respect others as much as I (or anyone)
can; the problem with behaviorists is that they have no idea how
behavior works. I've also met PCTers who have very little respect
for people I consider very respectable. I don't think people can
learn how to give respect to others by learning PCT. I think what
people can learn from PCT is what behavior (both their own and that
of the individuals they observe) is: the control of perception; they
can learn why behavior often looks like a response to stimulation, an
action strengthened by reinforcement or a planned output; they can
learn to recognize their _own_ efforts to keep their perceptions
under control and to see how their own purposes can lead to conflict
when the object of those purposes is the behavior of other individuals
who are also trying to keep their percpetions under control.
Teachers could learn from PCT that their _job_ is, at least partly,
to control the behavior of their students: keep them in class, in
chairs, not disturbing others, leaving only at the assigned recess
times, etc. They could learn that conflicts are an expected result
of trying to control behavior; they would know that efforts to "win"
these conflicts would lead to escalating conflict.
PCT can teach us a _lot_ about behavior but I don't believe it
can teach people how to respect others. But maybe I don't understand
what you mean by "respect others". If it means "hold in high esteem"
then I don't see how PCT can help me learn how to respect certain
people. Do you have some other meaning of "respect" in mind?
Power, equity and hegemony are concepts/issues I have been
researching for a number of years.
I do think PCT can help you understand these concepts; power,
equity and hegemony are, I think, words that describe perceptions
of various kinds of behavioral relationships between control
systems. I think you can mimic the kinds of behavioral interactions
described by the terms "power", "equity" and "hegemony" using two
or more control systems controlling the same or similar perceptions
with different relative gains, strength limits or higher level goals.
Anyway, welcome again to CSGNet. I'd like to hear what you think
about this so far.
Best
Rick
···
--
Richard S. Marken Phone or Fax: 310 474-0313
Life Learning Associates e-mail: marken@mindreadings.com
mindreadings.com