[From Rick Marken (971214.1120)]
Mark Lazare (various posts) --
I am trying to collect as much info as I can on Applied PCT, but
as your know there is more Computer Models and simulations and
arguments than applications put foreword. Anything you have
related to applying PCT
Yes. All the computer models, simulations and arguments put
forward (not to mention the on-line demos of control phenomena;
see http://home.earthlink.net/~rmarken/demos.html)
It looks like you are doing a pretty nice job of applying PCT
in real world situations, Mark. I'm applying it in more ordinary
(uunreal world;-)) situations -- like sitting at a computer
terminal (writing computer models, simulations and demos), working
on engineering projects at work (and trying to cooperate _and_
avoid conflicts with my cohorts) and talking on the net
(arguing -- I enjoy the conflicts on the net;-))
Well without quoting anyone per say -- who was against this
idea --- I believe a PCT Dictionary would be very helpful. I
have been away form these talk about IVs & DV's, Behavior,
control and output for 3 yrs but I can tell you they are
roughly the same arguments that were going on then.
I think a PCT dictionary is a fine idea (although there are
glossaries already -- one in B:CP and another at the end
of the ABS "Purposeful Behavior" issue) --I just don't think
such a dictionary will eliminate the arguments about PCT.
These arguments are (and will always be) the same because they
are really versions of the _same_ argument -- the one between
the conventional, cause-effect view of behavior and the PCT
closed-loop view of behavior. This argument will not end
until conventional life scientists stop defending the cause-
effect view (in any of its many guises -- natural selection,
non-linear systems, reinforcement theory, etc) and the PCT
view becomes the conventional view of behavior. When that
happens, there will be other (and, I think, far more
productive) arguments -- about the perceptual variables that
organisms actually control and the organization of systems that
control these variables.
A PCT Dictionary would be great if it also offered rebuttals
to common misperceptions.
Yes. But from the point of view of those who have these
"misperceptions", they are not misperceptions. They are
reputations and careers. So these "misperceptions" are defended
with great skill and zeal. There's not much we can do to get
these people to change their own internal organization --
the one that makes it impossible for them to participate fully
in the PCT revolution. But I confess to getting a wicked pleasure
from watching these people in opreation, especially when they
defend the conventional view in the guise of a supporter of the
PCT view. I know this is a moral failing on my part -- but I still
think it's healthier than watching network TV;-)
Best
Rick
···
--
Richard S. Marken Phone or Fax: 310 474-0313
Life Learning Associates e-mail: rmarken@earthlink.net
http://home.earthlink.net/~rmarken/