From A PopPCTer

From Ed Ford (940407.1325)

First, let me apologize for not being more active on the
net. I've a number of excuses, all of them great. I've
finished a manuscript and am now rewriting a book on
Discipline. Hester and I have had a steady stream of
grandchildren (three are living here now for the week,
ages 3,5, & 7). Also, have been dealing with a little
sickness. This does not include my traveling which has
slowed considerably for April and May.

Second, I really enjoyed Rick's review of my book and the
comments back and forth. It was interesting to see how
others perceive how I was thinking and what meaning I had
for various things I said.

What really fascinated me about Rick's review was his
attempt to understand my ideas on changing perceptions.
He apparently thought I saw perceptions as being changed
through the internal loop, imagination, if you will.
Those are those happy thoughts we create about someone
prior to our marriage. I wasn't talking about
hallucinatory approach. I was suggesting that (as Bill
rightly understood and mentioned) perceptions are changed
in any substantial way by what we create about a person
from the experiences we have with them.

Also, when he mentions that I spent too little time on
re-setting wants, apparently he missed a good deal of the
book. I talked a lot about the interrelated connection
between values, standards, and choices. I think that
would satisfy Rick's suggestion that I deal with the
"method of levels." Regardless, for someone who likes to
deal with stick wiggling and modeling, he did pretty

I also appreciated much Bill Powers' and Bill Leach's
remarks concerning FFS. I am sorry now I didn't get into
net at the time, but, life goes on.



Recently, I've read comments on PopPCT. I guess I'm a
PopPCTer. I think I got that right.

Rick (now that he's out of town for a few days) said
something interesting.

The only place changing perceptions comes into PCT is
during reorganization.

I've helped couples who couldn't stand each other or
parent/child relationships that were highly fragile and
watch them turn around completely as they began to build,
on a daily basis, very warm enjoyable experiences with
each other. I call it quality time. I guess
reorganization is really taking place, especially with
people who have never had any close experience. They are
learning to perceive someone in a totally new way. Other
couples are learning to rebuild what they once had but
had lost by becoming "passing ships in the night."

From my experience (where the rubber hits the road), PCT

really provides the way when it comes to dealing with
others, both as individuals, and as groups. When you
realize that in groups of people, each person is an
individual control system, each with her created
perceptions, established and prioritized wants and goals,
and a style of controlling her variables that is unique
to her, and everyone has these characteristics, then you
realize how amazing it is that we all get along was well
as we do. But from that PCT insight, you can help
organizations as well as individuals, learn ways
of dealing with each other that makes their lives much
more pleasant to live.

Another lesson is that you can't help WANTING to fix
other people; this is a want you have to learn to
change.....but it doesn't provide the techniques for
...."making the kids behave well."

I would like to alter what you've said slightly. PCT
offers the basis, the groundwork, the theory, upon which
you can build a whole way of helping those WHO WANT HELP,
powerful lesson. Clint Eastwood said it clearly in
Magnum Force. When his superior officer claimed he had
never had to pull his gun from its holster, Clint (as
Dirty Harry) remark, "Well, Lieutenant, You're a good
man, and a good man always knows his limitations."

PCT has certainly pointed the way to our own limits, and
the limits for dealing with others. It certainly
outlines clearly what we can or can't do. Obviously, we
are limited by how much others are willing to align their
reference levels with our own, how much they are willing
to cooperatively work with us, in a variety of ways. PCT
has really given me the foundation upon which I can build
a variety of programs. I've recently completed a book on
discipline, which at times has been difficult. I've been
doing a lot of work in several local elementary schools,
trying to help them bring order out of chaos. Without
PCT, I would have gotten nowhere. With it, I think I've
outlined a rather solid basis for bringing order out of
chaos in many schools and homes.

Enough said. Best, Ed

Ed Ford, 10209 N. 56th st., Scottsdale, AZ 85253
Phone 602 991-4860

<[Bill Leach 940408.21:31 EST(EDT)]

Ed Ford (940407.1325)

Rick (now that he's out of town for a few days) said
something interesting.

The only place changing perceptions comes into PCT is
during reorganization.

I no insights into reorganization but am concerned about my understanding
or lack thereof...

In B:CP, Bill's talks about reorganization occurring under conditions
where a high level of error exists in a control system with an intrinsic
reference signal.

I think that there is some conjecture that possibly the rate of
reorganizating "operations" may be a function of the magnitude of the

That there have been comments to the effect that reorganization may in
fact be occurring at some low level at all times has been proposed.

It has been described as everything from fully random to something that
may operate over very limited areas of the brain in a somewhat "pseudo-
random" manner.

I think that I have even read that it might be a "fundamental part" of
the idea of a DME.

I know that somehow I get the idea that this (at least partially) random
reorganization function IS the source of the development of "self-

OTOH, I have a real problem conceptualizing how the brain could be busy
"tearing apart" neural pathways (in all people at all times) without some
obvious deleterious results. I recognize that even with all of my
computer experience, I no doubt do not even begin to understand the
magnitude of the computing engine we call the brain.

In any event, I have a tough problem accepting that we can not change
"perceptions" without reorganization. I "feel" like when you are
controlling a perceptions and upon calm rational consideration believe
that this perception is not consistant with another more important goal
and choose to no longer attempt control of the first perception that this
volitional act does not require reorganization... either that, or I am a
long way from understanding reorganization.

     / /
     / -bill /
     / Bill Leach, W.R. Leach Co. /
     / /
     / ARS /
     / 919-362-7427 /