[From Bruce Abbott (950502.1040 EST)]
Rick Marken (950501.2120) --
Bruce Abbott (950501.1335 EST)
What has been missing is not so much the quantitative
manipulations as the proper way to model the system.
You keep ignoring the fact that control theory is about control. The
quantitative data on classical conditioning has nothing to do with
control. It was collected under the assumption that a CS causes a CR;
but there is no such causal path. There is just an organism controlling
a perception and acting, as necessary, to protect that perception from
the effects of ANY disturbance.
Let's keep things in their proper context. My statement was made to correct
Bill Powers' conjecture that quantitative manipulations of such variables as
CS and US intensity have not been done. I said yes they have, but
unfortunately these manipulations were not done with PCT in mind. Without
that framework the data collected may be less than ideally useful for
constructing control-systems models. It seems to me that we agree on this.
You continue to claim that PCT is the "proper" way to develop a model
of existing quantitative behavioral data. I suppose there is a sense in
which this is true; after all, these data are measures of aspects of the
behavior of a control system. But I think it is ultimately impossible to
demonstrate the value of PCT in terms of existing data. In fact, I think
it is impossible to use existing data to show that PCT is any better than a
cause-effect model. This is because existing data focus on apparent
cause-effect relationships rather than controlled variables.
I believe that extant data can guide the development of models of the
behaving organism which will demonstrate the phenomena of classical
conditioning. I have not claimed that such models can be fully developed
and tested entirely on the basis of extant data. In fact, I agree with you
that new data will have to be collected. The problem is, were do we start?
I suggest we start by reviewing what is known about some particular
well-studied system, such as those whose actions produce eyeblinks or
salivation, for hints about what perceptions may be controlled, and in what
way. Based on this information, we can design new studies to test for these
controlled perceptions and determine how the control systems involved are
structured and interconnected. We have to start somewhere--why not here?
Invitingly,
Bruce