[From Bruce Gregory (98430.0645 EDT)]
Welcome to CSGnet. We want your visit to be pleasant and instructive. Things
will go smoothly if you observe the following simple rules:
1. Ask questions. The more technical the better. Either Bill or Rick will
provide very clear and helpful answers. If you need further clarification,
ask for it.
2. Read B:CP at least once a year. More often if possible. The book contains
a great deal of material and you must read it half a dozen times to gain the
greatest benefit.
3. Keep your good ideas to yourself. If you are not prepared to offer an
explicit model, you are better off saying nothing. If you are tempted to
ignore this rule, by all means keep the next one.
4. If you encounter resistance from Bill or Rick, back off at once. Change
the subject. Unless that is, if you enjoy trading insults and engaging in
exchanges that go nowhere. Neither Bill nor Rick are famous for changing
their minds about anything.
5. If Rick is talking about a model, pay close and careful attention to what
he says. He knows what he is talking about. If Rick is addressing someone
else's understanding of PCT, ignore him. He has a tendency to erect straw
men and to pummel them mercilessly.
6. Most of what Bill writes is lucid and well thought out. His social views
however tend toward the knee-jerk radical. Cherish the former and avoid the
latter.
7. Applications of PCT, with the exception of the Method of Levels, get
short shrift here. Stick to models and you will get along fine.
8. Avoid, whenever possible, the temptation to state things in your own
words. Stick to the technical use of terms and you will stay out of trouble.
One Who Knows
[From Bruce Gregory (980430.1207 EDT)]
Rick Marken (980430.0900)]
Bruce Gregory (98430.0645 EDT)
> 3. Keep your good ideas to yourself. If you are not prepared to
> offer an explicit model, you are better off saying nothing.
If you are proposing these rules as good ideas then apparently
you are not following your own rule;-)
No, not a good idea, just a summary of my observations.
And how would one know whether or not an idea is good if they
are unable to offer it as an explicit, testable model?
See?
> 8. Avoid, whenever possible, the temptation to state things in
> your own words.
I think this suggestion is consistent with rule 3; it is not
a good idea. I think it's very useful to try to state things in
one's own words. You can tell, from the reaction you get from
people who understand what you are trying to describe, whether
what you say is consistent with their understanding. If you
can't seem to state things in a way that is acceptable to
the people who understand those things, you might be inclined
to reevaluate your understanding of (or, more importantly,
your _desire_ to understand) those things.
Can you model this? What is a desire to understand? What role does it play
in a control system?
Best Offer
[From Rick Marken (980430.0900)]
Bruce Gregory (98430.0645 EDT)
3. Keep your good ideas to yourself. If you are not prepared to
offer an explicit model, you are better off saying nothing.
If you are proposing these rules as good ideas then apparently
you are not following your own rule;-)
And how would one know whether or not an idea is good if they
are unable to offer it as an explicit, testable model?
8. Avoid, whenever possible, the temptation to state things in
your own words.
I think this suggestion is consistent with rule 3; it is not
a good idea. I think it's very useful to try to state things in
one's own words. You can tell, from the reaction you get from
people who understand what you are trying to describe, whether
what you say is consistent with their understanding. If you
can't seem to state things in a way that that is acceptable to
the the people who understand those things, you might be inclined
to reevaluate your undertsanding of (or, more importantly,
your _desire_ to understand) those things.
Best
Rick
···
--
Richard S. Marken Phone or Fax: 310 474-0313
Life Learning Associates e-mail: rmarken@earthlink.net
http://home.earthlink.net/~rmarken
[From Bruce Gregory (980430.1315 EDT)]
Rick Marken (980430.0930)
Bruce Gregory (980430.1207 EDT) --
> Can you model this?
Of course. But why don't you try. It would be a good exercise.
O.K. As far as I can tell, the relevant perception associated with
understanding PCT involves _not_ having Rick or Bill respond critically to
anything I say about PCT. So this is the reference signal -- "no negative
comments". When I can modify what I say on this net so that negative
comments don't happen, I am successfully controlling the perception we call
understanding PCT." When I control this perception, I demonstrate a desire
to understand.
How's that?
Best Offer
[From Rick Marken (980430.0930)]
Bruce Gregory (980430.1207 EDT) --
Can you model this?
Of course. But why don't you try. It would be a good exercise.
What is a desire to understand?
A reference signal specifying a particular level of the
perception "understanding"
What role does it play in a control system?
The role of reference signal.
Completion of the model is left as an exercise.
Best
Rick
···
--
Richard S. Marken Phone or Fax: 310 474-0313
Life Learning Associates e-mail: rmarken@earthlink.net
http://home.earthlink.net/~rmarken
[From Rick Marken (980430.1040)]
Bruce Gregory (980430.1315 EDT)]
O.K. As far as I can tell, the relevant perception associated with
understanding PCT involves _not_ having Rick or Bill respond
critically to anything I say about PCT.
That's a _state_ of a perceptual _variable_. The variable might be
something like "degree to which Rick or Bill respond critically".
Call that variable p.
So this is the reference signal -- "no negative comments".
Right. The reference for the variable p is 0.
When I can modify what I say on this net so that negative
comments don't happen, I am successfully controlling the
perception we call understanding PCT."
Yes. The output of this control system is "what you say". This
is a variable; you have different ways of describing control.
This output influences the controlled variable "degree to which
Rick or Bill respond critically".
How's that?
Pretty darn good. So you see that you can model this. It would also
be nice to try to draw this out as a functional flow diagram,
labeling all the variables, signals and functions. This would
help you answer questions like "what would constitute a disturbance
to the controlled variable?".
Bruce Gregory 9980430.1320 EDT)--
Indeed. You've got to be prepared to use the "final solution" if
you want to insure success in controlling a perception.
Only if the perception is of a variable that is also being
controlled by another control system. That is, only when you
are doing coercive control.
Best
Rick
···
--
Richard S. Marken Phone or Fax: 310 474-0313
Life Learning Associates e-mail: rmarken@earthlink.net
http://home.earthlink.net/~rmarken