[From Dag Forssell (2002.06.26 08:55 PDT)]
[From Bill Powers (2002.05.08.0807 MDT)]
Bruce Nevin (2002.05.07 21:10 EDT)--
>Sequences that are not short and stereotyped, however well learned they
may be, are not events at >level 5 in the (current) standard proposal about
the perceptual hierarchy. .....I'm not very happy about the state of Level 5. It's too much like the
sequence level. My reasons for wanting events to be at that level are
getting pretty ragged, if not fading from memory entirely. I would support
a principled effort to justify doing away with this level altogether and
letting its supposed functions be handled by the current sequence level.
Why shouldn't the next level up from transitions be relationships, still an
analog type of variable? Then the process of categorization would provide a
clean demarkation between continuous and discrete control processes. For
some reason that sounds nice to me.
I noted
"My reasons for wanting events to be at that level are
getting pretty ragged, if not fading from memory entirely. I would support
a principled effort to justify doing away with this level altogether."
I think it is OK to expect others to carry on the introspection and
development you went through to suggest the levels in the first place. I
wonder if you are saying here that you want to do away with events
altogether, or if you meant something else. I am not concerned and am not
really asking, but this exchange "stimulated" me to make an effort to make
the following available on CSGnet.
Frans Plooij has made an effort to introduce some fundamentals of PCT and
specifically the idea of reorganization in the summary chapter of a book
(now in print) he has edited with a colleague. His purpose is not to mix
PCT with something else, but to show others that PCT explains what they are
concerned about. The summary chapter contains an extensive discussion of
events. The chapter is available from me on request as a 200 kb pdf file
"Plooij Trilogy prepub ms.pdf" and may be freely circulated.
Frans planned to reprint the illustration of reorganization shown on page
188 of B:CP, but Bill has now redrawn that illustration to remove the
opportunity to interpret it as if reorganization operates from above. This
revised illustration is included here. The pdf-file can be viewed and
printed, but is otherwise password protected against changing and
extraction of text and images.
Best, Dag