Enemies

Bruce_Gregory4 · December 18, 2003, 11:34pm

[From Bruce Gregory (2003.12.18.1834)]

[From Bill Powers (2003.12.18.1610 MST)]

Martin Taylor 2003.12.18.1725 EST--

Surely my belief about anything is a perception of the way the world
works in respect of that thing? My "belief about" is anly a way of
saying my "perception of the validity of", isn't it?

Thank you, Martin. You appear to agree with my definition of
perception:
anything you experience.

Which seems to leave leave unaddressed Marc's contention that some
people experience Jews as unworthy of living.

Bruce Gregory

"Everything that needs to be said has already been said. But since no
one was listening, everything must be said again."

Andre Gide

Marc_Abrams1 · December 18, 2003, 11:42pm

from [Marc Abrams (2003.12.18.1837)]

[From Rick Marken (2003.12.18.1515)]

Excuse me, wrong choice of words. What is a reference "signal"? Not
condition

Marc

Marken_Richard · December 18, 2003, 11:57pm

[From Rick Marken (2003.12.18.1555)]

Bill Powers (2003.12.18.1619 MST)--

"Reference level" and "reference condition" have to do with controlled
variables: that is, the states of environmental variables that an outside
observer deduces are being controlled by another control system.

That's fine. I should have said that the reference condition is that state
of an environmental (rather than a perceptual) variable that requires
no change in the actions of the control system.

But then what term do we use to refer to the state of a perceptual variable
that requires no change in the actions of the control system?

Best

Rick

···

--
Richard S. Marken
MindReadings.com
Home: 310 474 0313
Cell: 310 729 1400

Marken_Richard · December 18, 2003, 11:59pm

[From Rick Marken (2003.12.18.1600)

Marc Abrams (2003.12.18.1837)--

Excuse me, wrong choice of words. What is a reference "signal"? Not
condition

A reference signal is a variable in the control model that specifies the
state of the perceptual signal that requires no change in the action of the
control system.

Best

Rick

···

---
Richard S. Marken
MindReadings.com
Home: 310 474 0313
Cell: 310 729 1400

Marc_Abrams1 · December 19, 2003, 12:05am

from [Marc Abrams (2003.12.18.1902)]

[From Bruce Gregory (2003.12.18.1834)]

> [From Bill Powers (2003.12.18.1610 MST)]
>
> Martin Taylor 2003.12.18.1725 EST--
>
>> Surely my belief about anything is a perception of the way the world
>> works in respect of that thing? My "belief about" is anly a way of
>> saying my "perception of the validity of", isn't it?
>
> Thank you, Martin. You appear to agree with my definition of
> perception:
> anything you experience.

Which seems to leave leave unaddressed Marc's contention that some
people experience Jews as unworthy of living.

How? This seems to explain it quite well from both sides of the issue. The
perceptions need to change for _all_ concerned.

Marc

Bruce_Gregory4 · December 19, 2003, 12:35am

[From Bruce Gregory (2003.12.18.1935)]

Marc Abrams (2003.12.18.1902)

How? This seems to explain it quite well from both sides of the issue.
The
perceptions need to change for _all_ concerned.

Except Rick and I.

Bruce Gregory

"Everything that needs to be said has already been said. But since no
one was listening, everything must be said again."

Andre Gide

Marc_Abrams1 · December 19, 2003, 12:47am

from [Marc Abrams (2003.12.18.1915)]

[From Bruce Gregory (2003.12.18.1935)]

Except Rick and I.

I was talking about the Arabs & Jews. But I'll take what I can get.

Marc

Martin_Taylor2 · December 19, 2003, 1:08am

[From Bruce Gregory (2003.12.18.1737)]

Martin Taylor 2003.12.18.1725 EST

As is the perception that my hand approaches my glass distinct from
my perception of my hand and of my glass.

Surely my belief about anything is a perception of the way the world
works in respect of that thing? My "belief about" is anly a way of
saying my "perception of the validity of", isn't it?

Are you agreeing with me, as I perceive, or are you disagreeing with me
as you seem to perceive?

I thought I was disagreeing. Did you not say, in the message to which
I was responding, "Do you mean to say that beliefs are perceptions?
This is not my
experience."

I am saying that beliefs ARE perceptions.

Martin

Martin_Taylor2 · December 19, 2003, 1:18am

[From Bruce Gregory (2003.12.18.1834)]

[From Bill Powers (2003.12.18.1610 MST)]

Martin Taylor 2003.12.18.1725 EST--

Surely my belief about anything is a perception of the way the world
works in respect of that thing? My "belief about" is anly a way of
saying my "perception of the validity of", isn't it?

Thank you, Martin. You appear to agree with my definition of
perception:
anything you experience.

Which seems to leave leave unaddressed Marc's contention that some
people experience Jews as unworthy of living.

In what way does it leave that unaddressed?

There is a perception, among whose inputs are perceptions of Jews
acting in the world, of the ways the world works, of what constitutes
values, and so on. The nature of the perception is the worthiness of
Jews, and the value of the perception, in the people you describe, is
very low.

To describe that low value as "unworthy of living" implies that one
of the inputs is another perception, relating to values of living and
non-living objects. But all of those are perceptions, beliefs, call
them what you will in everyday language. In PCT technical terms, they
are perceptions.

Martin

Bruce_Gregory4 · December 19, 2003, 2:29am

[From Bruce Gregory (2003.12.18.2128)]

To describe that low value as "unworthy of living" implies that one
of the inputs is another perception, relating to values of living and
non-living objects. But all of those are perceptions, beliefs, call
them what you will in everyday language. In PCT technical terms, they
are perceptions.

O.K. I know how to aler goals in PCT technical terms. How do you alter
perceptions in PCT technical terms?

Bruce Gregory

"Everything that needs to be said has already been said. But since no
one was listening, everything must be said again."

Andre Gide

···

On Dec 18, 2003, at 8:18 PM, Martin Taylor wrote:

Bill_Powers · December 19, 2003, 3:27am

[From Bill Powers(2003.12.18.2001 MST)]

Rick Marken (2003.12.18.1555)--

But then what term do we use to refer to the state of a perceptual variable
that requires no change in the actions of the control system?

Good point. I think I usually say that the perceptual signal (not
perceptual variable) matches the reference signal, or that the error
(signal) is zero. But I'm not sure -- I might have become sloppy and said
once or twice that the perceptual signal is at its reference level. I try
to keep signals (inside the control system) distinct from quantities
(outside the control system), but "variable" applies anywhere, doesn't it?
I tend to say "variable" when speaking of the environment, though.

I don't know if this term "signal" carries the right meaning for people who
haven't been doing electronic stuff most of their lives as I have. In the
sense I mean, there are no "signals" in the environment. Let me try to
explain this usage.

In electronics, there are two kinds of electrical currents or voltages, and
I don't mean positive and negative. If a wire carries enough current, or
can supply enough power, to operate directly an electromechanical device
like a loudspeaker or a heater or a motor, the wire is referred to as a
"power" line. The current flowing in that line is what makes the device
run, physically.

Some wires, however, carry voltages or currents so small that they would be
shorted out by a wet gnat landing on the exposed wire. The power would be
measured in milliwatts or microwatts instead of watts or kilowatts. Often
an amplifer is required to bring the power level up to where it would be
enough to operate even an in indicator light. The voltages and currents in
these wires are called signals, because their function is only to carry a
measurement, an indication of a quantity, a kind of information, about
something. For example, a photoelectric cell generates a current
proportional to the light intensity its cathode receives. As the light
intensity rises and falls, this current increases and decreases. Therefore
the number of microamperes flowing in the wire indicates the number of
foot-candles of illumination of the photocell. Electronikers would call
that current, probably, the "light signal." It's the signal representing
the amount of light. We would NOT mean that the light "is a signal" that
something has happened. We would mean that the current is an electrical
signal indicating the amount of light, rather than a power transfer that is
intended to operate a device. So you will hear electronics engineers saying
that it's a good idea to keep signal wires separated from power wires, so
they don't pick up interference. Signal wires carry only very small amounts
of electrical power, and serve as indicators that something else has a
certain magnitude.

That is why I say "perceptual signal." I mean the neural current flowing in
an axon, which carries only the feeblest amount of energy, but serves to
carry a measurement from one place to another in the nervous system.

I have seen remarks here and there which might indicate that someone is not
aware of this usage, and is thinking that a signal is like the horn that
goes off to tell golfers to seek shelter when lightning is nearby, or the
flash of white as a mule deer flicks its tail. That's an entirely different
usage of the word "signal" and is unconnected to the way I use it in PCT.

Best,

Bill P.

Marc_Abrams1 · December 19, 2003, 4:00am

from [Marc Abrams (2003.12.18.2252)]

[From Bruce Gregory (2003.12.18.2128)]

O.K. I know how to aler goals in PCT technical terms. How do you alter
perceptions in PCT technical terms?

By altering the inputs, either from memory or the environment. But since
memory is not currently a separate entity and is not modeled as such in PCT,
I would simply say a change in the input function. That is, a change in what
you perceive.

Marc

Martin_Taylor2 · December 19, 2003, 5:11am

[Martin Taylor 2003.12.19.0009 EST]

[From Bruce Gregory (2003.12.18.2128)]

To describe that low value as "unworthy of living" implies that one
of the inputs is another perception, relating to values of living and
non-living objects. But all of those are perceptions, beliefs, call
them what you will in everyday language. In PCT technical terms, they
are perceptions.

O.K. I know how to aler goals in PCT technical terms. How do you alter
perceptions in PCT technical terms?

You see something different. Move your eyes. Wait. Listen.

All of those work.

If you are talking about a belief, maybe you observe something that
is an input into the function that defines the nature of the belief.

Martin

···

On Dec 18, 2003, at 8:18 PM, Martin Taylor wrote:

Martin_Taylor2 · December 19, 2003, 5:14am

[Martin Taylor 2003.12.19.0013]

From [Marc Abrams (2003.12.18.2252)]

[From Bruce Gregory (2003.12.18.2128)]

O.K. I know how to aler goals in PCT technical terms. How do you alter
perceptions in PCT technical terms?

By altering the inputs, either from memory or the environment.

Right.

But since
memory is not currently a separate entity and is not modeled as such in PCT,
I would simply say a change in the input function.

That's a change, not in the perception, but in the nature of the perception.

Martin

Richard_Marken2 · December 19, 2003, 5:19am

[From Rick Marken (2003.12.18.2120)]

Marc Abrams (2003.12.18.2252)--

Bruce Gregory (2003.12.18.2128)--

O.K. I know how to aler goals in PCT technical terms. How do you alter
perceptions in PCT technical terms?

By altering the inputs, either from memory or the environment.

I think I could understand this better if you could suggest a
demonstration of this phenomenon.

Best

Rick

···

---
Richard S. Marken
marken@mindreadings.com
Home 310 474-0313
Cell 310 729-1400

Bill_Williams1 · December 19, 2003, 5:56am

[From Bill Williams 18 December 2003 11:30 PM CST]

Marc,

from [Marc Abrams (2003.12.18.1158)]

[From Bill Williams 17 December 2003 11:11 PM CST]

The Islamic fundamentalist I've been talking to claims that the Koran

strictly regulates the treatment of >unbelievers, and "people of the book."
According to him a Christian or Jew can live in an Islamic society live well

and expect to be treated respectfully. As I understand it the treatment

accorded unbelievers is different that that >which regulates the status of
"people of the book." And, there is no question that to be a full
participant in an >Islamic society that you must be a believer in "the one
true God." However, it wouldn't surprize me if there were >Islamic sects in
which outsiders are treated poorly.

Bill, this really has nothing to do with your thread, but I think from an
historical perspective it's nice to hear and know different views.
Throughout history, Jews have generally lived quite nicely and well among
muslims, as eveidenced by the number of Jews living in "arab" countries
_prior_ to the break up of the Ottoman Empire. Of course much had to do with
the feelings of the reigning Caliph (A Caliph being similair in stature to
that of the Pope) and his views at any given point in time, but overall
things were not horrible. It wasn't until after the First World War and the
break-up of the Ottoman Empire, the end of the Caliph's, and the begginings
of Arab nationalism did the trouble really begin in the middle east. It was
no coincidence that the middle east provided Hitler with a tremendous amount
of support. The Jews were and continue to be a scapegoats for much hate.
Unfortunately, being an anti-zionist is a pc way of being anti-semetic. If
you know your history you could not possibly think of Israel as an
illegitmate state, without thinking the same thing about _EVERY_ other
country in the middle east, after all, _EVERY_ country there was a
_POLITICALLY_ constructed entity of the _20TH_ century, except for Egypt.

I may not have made it clear when I reported the Arab student's perception concerning the status of Israel, that I _did not_ share his view of the situation. I think that I may _understand_ his view to some extent, but that is a different matter. Sorry for the confusion. I think it is well to keep in mind all that you say above.

Ask your friend about Dhimmi's. Ask your friend about whether a Jew who
witnessed a murder can testify in court against a muslim accused of that
murder? Ask your friend if Jews are allowed to enter Saudi Arabia. Ask your
friend about the tolerance Saudi's have for Christians practicing there
faith in public in Saudi Arabia.

You keep referring to this guy as "my friend." I don't think of him as "my friend." That isn't at all what is involved. We have very very different views concerning the world, lets refer to him as my "arab coversationalist." And, we do have some extremely interesting conversations. One of the topics has been the problem presented by the state of Saudi society. There are differences between the various Arab cultures, some deep divisions that may not be evident if you have not studied the questions involved closely or known Arabs on a reasonably familiar basis. I'm only superfically informed as a result of a casual interest and because I am in contact with Arab students.

I am not passing judgement on any of the persons or the cultures either for that matter, that are involved in the conflict. I'm playing in a trival way with being an amatuer cultural anthropologist surveying an exotic struggle. I am not so much interested in the outcome of the on going conflicts between Christian, Arab, and Jews as I am in what it discloses about how people behave when systems level constructs are disturbed. I don't find the resulting behaviors are all that reassuring.

I've found it intresting talking to this Islamic fellow. Sometimes

"interesting" isn't quite the right word for it, >"stunned" is closer to the
effect upon me of some extra-ordinarily candid disclosures. Not any more
stunning, I will >say, than the effect of realizing that people I thought
were quite genuine Christian believers were also racists of >deep
conviction.

Bill, It _always_ takes two to tango.

People keep saying this, but I don't remember having signed any dance cards.

And, despite my cordial conversations with Arab students, I'm not an anti-Zionist. I am quite sure that I could live a better life in Israel than I could in an Islamic society.

Bill Williams

Marc_Abrams1 · December 19, 2003, 6:28am

from [Marc Abrams (2003.12.19.0122)]

[From Rick Marken (2003.12.18.2120)]

I think I could understand this better if you could suggest a
demonstration of this phenomenon.

I heartily agree. As I said in an earlier post, I'm not prepared yet to go
'public'. Bill was nice enough to suggest an outline I should follow if I
wanted serious consideration to be given to my ideas, I agree completely,
and I'm currently working on it. I don't want to post a part of it because
everything is very much entwined and I am not prepared to cover all the
bases yet, so please have some patience. Maybe Martin or Bill can come up
with something you can sink your teeth into right now. I can't. I can only
give you words.

Sorry,

Marc

Marc_Abrams1 · December 19, 2003, 7:09am

from [Marc Abrams (2003.12.19.0131)]

[From Bill Williams 18 December 2003 11:30 PM CST]

Ask your friend about Dhimmi's. Ask your friend about whether a Jew who
witnessed a murder can testify in court against a muslim accused of that
murder? Ask your friend if Jews are allowed to enter Saudi Arabia. Ask your
friend about the tolerance Saudi's have for Christians practicing there
faith in public in Saudi Arabia.

You keep referring to this guy as "my friend." I don't think of him as "my
friend."

Sorry, It's just a lot shorter to say then the
Arab-person-you-happen-to-know. I didn't mean that you were drinking
buddies.

That isn't at all what is involved. We have very very different views
concerning the world, lets refer to him as my "arab coversationalist."

How about AC.

And, we do have some extremely interesting conversations. One of the topics
has been the problem presented by the state of Saudi society. There are
differences between the various Arab cultures, some deep divisions that may
not be evident if you have not studied the questions involved closely or
known Arabs on a reasonably familiar basis. I'm only superfically informed
as a result of a casual interest and because I am in contact with Arab
students.

_THIS_ has been the saving grace for Israel actually. The division amongst
the Arab nationalists (Baath Party types, Egypt, Syria, & until recently
Iraq) and Islamist's (Saudi Arabia). Many people don't remember the civial
war in Jordan in the '70's, when Arafat was thrown into the West Bank after
his defeat. Jordon was only to happy to give up the West bank to Israel when
it lost the last war. The same with Egypt and the Gaza. See if either one of
them want their territories back, because that's who it belongs to, _NOT_
the 'Palestenians' (whoever they are). You want to end the 'Palestenian'
problem, give both area's back to their respective countries. In 1948 the
'Palestenians walked away from a UN sanctioned partition because they
believed the combined Arab armies would swiftly defeat the new country of
Israel. They gambled and lost. They have lost in four more subsequent
attempts to destroy Israel. Two years ago Arafat walked away from a peace
treaty at Camp David, without an explanation or a counter-offer. Instead he
started another war (infitadah?). For this he is hailed as a great hero.
PLeeeeeeze, give me abreak.

I am not passing judgement on any of the persons or the cultures either for

that matter, that are involved in the >conflict. I'm playing in a trival way
with being an amatuer cultural anthropologist surveying an exotic struggle.
I >am not so much interested in the outcome of the on going conflicts
between Christian, Arab, and Jews as I am in >what it discloses about how
people behave when systems level constructs are disturbed. I don't find the
resulting behaviors >are all that reassuring.

Bill, you don't have to 'pass' judgement. You think the middle east is bad?
What about the slavery going on in Africa today? What about Northern
Ireland? The _history_ of mankind is littered with this stuff. Speak to
Martin Taylor about this. This isn't something new to the 21st century.
Cultural conflicts are the _norm_ not the exception and it's all about the
perceptions people have, perceptions that are most likely a combination of
imagination, distortions, and ignorance with very little 'real' data to
confuse anyone with.

And, despite my cordial conversations with Arab students, I'm not an
anti-Zionist. I am quite sure that I could live a better life in Israel than
I could in an Islamic society.

The average Arab certainly could as well, and I hope you did not think I was
inferring you were anti-Semitic. Not even close, Please ask AC about the
concept of Dhimmi's. I'm curious to hear what he has to say about it.

Marc

Bill_Williams1 · December 19, 2003, 8:15am

[From Bill Williams 19 December 2003 2:15 AM CST]

Marc Abrams (2003.12.19.0131)] says,

Please ask AC about the concept of Dhimmi's. I'm curious to hear what he has to say about it.

I plan to approach this a bit cautiously. I am going to look into it myself, before tossing what might be a bomb into what has been a long standing dialog concerning Islam, Christianity and recent events.

Bill Williams

Marc_Abrams1 · December 19, 2003, 8:23am

from [Marc Abrams (2003.12.19.0321)]

[From Bill Williams 19 December 2003 2:15 AM CST]

Marc Abrams (2003.12.19.0131)] says,

Please ask AC about the concept of Dhimmi's. I'm curious to hear what he has
to say about it.

I plan to approach this a bit cautiously. I am going to look into it

myself, before tossing what might be a bomb into >what has been a long
standing dialog concerning Islam, Christianity and recent events.

Are you familiar with the concept? If so what do you know about it?

Marc