[from Joel Judd 930520]
Bill, Greg, Rick:
Of course as soon as I mention to Greg that there didn't seem to be too
much interest in "ethics" this time 'round postings appear. I think I
understood from the start that the PCT model itself is, as Bill said,
amoral. Its functioning is not "right" or "wrong," except as higher
levels in the hierarchy, or those of another's, judge it as such. I
agree, ans so don't bring up related issues much because at present
these ideas aren't fit into the model.
What I would like to eventually figure out is, as I mentioned, how
a highest level comes upon reference states for its controlled
perceptions. Ethics, as this and other net discussions seems to
confirm, HAS to be a part of systems concepts.
[unscientific aside] In defense of the missionary who "accosted" you
at the U. of K. (Greg)--and if this reponse satisfies someone's
test for controlled variable I'm happy to oblige(!)--let me say
that ALL kinds go out on missions for the LDS church (me included).
If I had been the one who ran into you, who knows what I would have
said?! Anyway, some who go to foreign countries fail to adjust and
have to return to the states in a matter of weeks; others find
immense "success" through patience and longsuffering and kindness
(even getting killed once in a while). And then there's every kind
of person in between.
Their message is not ethical neutral--it's not meant to be. But I
have yet to hear a representative from another religion present the
message with the caveat that each individual determine its
"truthfulness" for himself. Perhaps that didn't come through in
your dialogue (or monologue?) with him. Did he tell you were wrong
if you didn't accept their message? That's not part of the preparation
we receive (though again, missionaries are people too and decide
how and when to say something).
My point in bringing this up is that I personally believe that my own
experiences have contributed to a greater appreciation of my fellow
human beings. That's my fundamental interest in PCT, too. With respect
to my own church's practice of sending out teenage males, I believe
that for the majority of them, such experience gives them the same
appreciation. I think if you were to speak with any of the local or
general authorities of the church, you would not get such a zealous
or overbearing approach. That's part of being young and thinking you
know what's right. Being a missionary teaches the missionary as much
or more about life than he or she ever teaches anyone else. Should
I ever get into a discussion about "purpose of life" or related
issues, I would be adamant about the correctness of the concepts I
hold. But I would be equally adamant about your right to hold
other concepts, as long as they allow both of us to peacefully
coexist. I have come to mine through 32 years of experience. I
can't transmit that experience to someone else's mind, to have
them some to understand things the way I do. Yet through different
people's _individual_ approaches to the theology I espouse, I have
found amazing similarities among congregations I have known in
different parts of the States, South America, Korea, and now Puerto
Rico.
This is why I will continue to pursue an understanding of HPCT
which allows for one to be "inspired"; to gain understandings
which come from beyond the confines of this terrestial environment
as well as make determinations of ethical and moral "goodness"
which respect people's autonomy without degenerating into a
dangerous relativism.
Bruce, Bill, Rick & Tom--LANGUAGE
Language acquisition as a means to an end is the same conclusion
a few psychologists such as Jerome Bruner have come to in studying
child language (_Child's Talk_). Also, Mark Bickhard's chapter on
environmental constraints in language development is finally out,
though I don't have the reference with me here. If Gary or someone
else doesn't post it by the next time I read mail, I'll send it.
I think Bickhard's ideas about epistemology are relevant to recent
discussions about information in the input. There was sort of a
mutual "no thank you" when Gary tried to involve him in discussions
before. But I think there are possibilities in his approach to
knowledge that don't require information to be "transmitted" from
the environment, or for knowledge to be "prewired" from birth,
the two horns of the traditional development of knowledge dilemma.
_Knowing Levels and Developmental Stages_ is a thankfully short
but informative intro to these ideas. I would be happy to discuss
those ideas if others were to read it (authors are Campbell & Bickhard).
Regards,
Joel