[from Mary Powers 2000.11.26]
Bruce A. winds up his post of 2000.11.24.1125 EST with:
"And guess what, the process I've described comes down to two control
loops, one nested inside the other".
Well, Ta-Da. There was a PCT rabbit in the hat after all. But it seems to
me that no matter where you start, with EAB or whatever point of view, when
you analyse living systems you will eventually get to control loops because
that's what's there.
This is a bit odd in the case of EABers, at least some of whom find notions
about what might be inside an organism "spooky" (your word).
As I understand it, a first principle of EAB is to understand behavior
strictly in terms of what can be observed. In the case of organisms, this
is going to mean trying to understand control loops, which loop through the
organism into the environment and through the environment back into the
organism, in terms of the environmental part only. And entirely in terms of
what the organism is "doing" (behavior) rather than doing (varying actions
to achieve a goal, satisfy a need, etc., etc.)
Accepting only what can be observed was a worthy goal at one time, because
having goals, whether in oneself or one's mice, simply could not be handled
conceptually. It necessarily invoked some kind of vitalist principle that
living, apparently purposive, systems had and non-living ones did not.
Spooky? You bet. Better to try to be objective and scientific and leave all
that stuff out.
But the recognition that living systems are control systems has now been in
the world for something like sixty years. Isn't it time for EABers (and any
other behavioral, social or life scientists) to deal with that? You don't
even have to use those horrid anthropomorphic terms like intention and
purpose (except maybe when you are talking about people). "Reference
signal" is surely as austere and neutral a term as "reinforcement".
It is paradoxical that while some people find any internal explanation for
behavior (such as PCT) spooky, there are others who dislike PCT because it
is too "mechanistic" (apparently, in some cases, people who want or need a
mystery principle of life). As has been said a number of times, if you
approach PCT with your own agenda (of using it to prove that what you have
been thinking all along is right) you are bound to be dissatisfied.
Mary P.