[From Rick Marken (960716.0845)]
Me:
When I said that threading a needle blindfolded can't be done, I meant
that it can't be done as needle threading is normally done; ...
Hans Blom (960715) --
Then everything was just one big misunderstanding. Now, can we be friends
again?
I'm sure you're a real nice guy, Hans, but I'm afraid friendship is not in
the cards for us -- until, of course, you start saying and doing things that
reflect an understanding and acceptance of the fact that organisms are
perceptual control systems.
I know that your interest is in "improving" PCT through the addition of model-
based control. The only problem with this is that you have presented no
evidence that the basic control model needs improvement (we're currently
accounting for 99% of the variance in most of our data) nor have you
presented evidence that the model-based system is the improvement that will
account for whatever unexplained variance exists in our data.
I find your efforts to "improve" PCT particularly annoying, not just because
there is no evidence for the necessity of these improvements (yet) but
because the particular improvements you suggest are precisely the models of
behavior currently in fashion with conventional behavior theorists (who,
incidently, will not give PCT the time -- or the light -- of day). Model-
based control has nothing to do with perceptual control; regardless of it's
merits in engineering design (which I believe are minor), model-based control
obviously scores points with life scientists because it is compatible with
their cause-effect view of behavior. Offering this model as an addition that
"improves" PCT strikes me as being similar to offering "impetus" as an
addition to Newton that obviously improves his "limited model" of dynamics.
I know that you think we all just see the world in a different ways and that
we all should be friends because it's all just a matter of opinion. But I'm
afraid that I see the world quite differently. I think that, in science, some
models of reality (imagined realities, as Bruce Gregory would say) are better
than others; the better model is determined by observation (experiment). I
labor under the belief that observation shows that PCT is the current best
model of behavior; this model is completely inconsistent with cause-effect
models of behavior, like model-based controllers. This is just the way it is.
I believe that, in science anyway, there is a right and a wrong (model of
behavior, in this case).
I also find that the difference between right and wrong models of behavior
_matters to me_. I believe that all people operate on the basis of an
implicit model of the nature of the other people they deal with and that many
people -- including policy- makers, executives, parents, teachers, etc.,
people who can make a difference in the quality of people's lives -- have
been operating on the basis of the wrong model of people. I think the world
will be a better place (for all people and living things in general) once we
are operating on the basis of something more like the correct model of human
nature -- PCT. It is important to me, therefore, that people understand PCT.
So it's hard for me to be friendly with people who don't understand PCT- -
particularly those who won't try or those who say they do understand it when
they say things that clearly indicate that they don't.
Since I think the evidence for PCT -- and against any cause-effect model of
behavior -- is overwhelming, I also find it difficult to be friends with
people who may understand PCT but don't want to accept it. I don't dislike
such people; I just find it hard to deal with them. This is especially true
when I know that these people have had access to the data relevant to making
a judgment about PCT. I guess I assume that people who have seen the evidence
and still don't accept the fact that people are perceptual control systems
simply have another agenda. I feel the same way about people who are familiar
with the evidence in the OJ trial and still think OJ might not be a murderer;
there is obviously another agenda there -- and it's hard for me to be friends
with people who have agendas that get in the way of their sweet reason.
So I don't dislike you at all, Hans. It's _some_ of your ideas -- the ones
that are inconsistent with PCT that I dislike. But as long as you cling to
those ideas, I'm afraid I'm not going to feel all friendly and cuddly towards
you. That's not much of a loss for you, though. I'm kind of a bore in person
and you'd get sick of my Bob Dylan imitations in no time;-))
Best
Rick