I came across PCT around 2010 and was very interested in it but life and responsibilities led me in another direction at the time.
So I’m back now and have some questions but I’m unsure exactly how to word my question(s).
But here we go…(struggling to word it now, ugh…sigh…”
Oops I accidentally hit send evidently.
I feel like i need to give a lot of background information and …. Anyway, I’ll try this just to get the ball rolling hopefully.
Where does the ego fit into PCT or does it?
Hi Andrew
I think “ego” is a theoretical concept. If so, then it doesn’t fit into PCT at all. But if “ego” is a phenomenon then PCT can probably offer an explanation of it. So what do you mean by “ego”?
Best, Rick
Couldn’t ego be seen as the phenomenon whereby a person wants things to be as he desires? That is, it can be seen as the highest level reference which wants to minimize the total error. The less error, the more things are as one desires, the better egoistically.
Ego is especially a problem when a person identifies with the total error. For example, instead of there simply being a large total error, one might instead perceive that “I’m bad, a problem, broken, etc,” identifying with the total error. So in this view, ego is not a theoretical concept but actually the highest level reference - you could even say the optimization function that controls the overall system.
Thanks Rick for the response. I get a little confused by the various definitions of “ego”…from Freud, Jung, and the latest psychological definitions, actually they all fit what I’m trying to aim at. How do i use PCT in my day to day life to experience less suffering and experience actual reality?
Hi Alessin
If the ego were seen that way then it would be a theoretical concept that corresponds to reference signals that are the “wants” in PCT. These reference signals are wants in the sense that they specifications for what should be perceived.
We infer the existence of reference signals because we see people acting to get and maintain aspects of the environment (perceptions) in desired (reference) states. That is, we infer wants (reference signals) when we observe the phenomenon of control.
We can’t really “see” ego as the highest level perception. The idea that there is some highest level reference acting to minimize total error is a theory, which would make more sense to me if I knew what phenomenon that theory was trying to explain.
I don’t think comparing PCT to other theories of mind/behavior is a very useful way to learn it. The best approach to learning PCT is to start with the phenomenon that PCT explains, which is the phenomenon of control as it is seen in the behavior of living organisms.
Control is seen in people when we see them act to maintain (or try to maintain) aspects of their environment – their perceptions – in reference (goal) states, protected from disturbance. So people are controlling when they are doing simple things like walking down the street-- maintaining their perception of standing upright-- protected from force disturbances created by irregularities in the sidewalk and their own pendular stepping motions, or doing more complex things like being married – maintaining their perception of being in a loving relationship – protected from disturbances like disagreements about finances or how to raise the kids.
Once you understand the phenomenon of control as seen in the behavior of people (and other living things) you can start to understand and enjoy the explanatory power of the elegant theory that explains it.
Best, Rick
Hi Andrew
My son is a high school math teacher and when his students ask “what use is math, when will we ever use it?” he says “I use it everyday.” That’s funny because he teaches math but it’s also true because everyday he uses the reasoning skills he developed from learning math and everyday his life is enriched by the beauty, elegance and knowledge provided by math.
The same applies to me and PCT. I use PCT in my daily life, not only because doing research and writing about it has been my main occupation for the last 40+ years, but also because I regularly use the reasoning skills I developed from learning PCT at the foot of the master (Bill Powers) and also because my life is enriched daily by the beauty, elegance and knowledge provided by PCT.
But you ask how PCT can be used in your day to day life “to experience less suffering and experience actual reality”. That is, what is the practical value of PCT. As I said above, the practical value of PCT for me is that it provides intellectual enrichment in the form of knowledge about the nature of the universe into which we have had the good luck to be born. In particular, it gives us an approach to understanding that aspect of the universe that we call “life”.
If you are interested in reducing your suffering then the therapy based on PCT called Methods of Levels (MOL) might help, depending on the source of your suffering. If the source is insuperable disturbance (like the death of a spouse) then MOL won’t mitigate the suffering much but it might help you get through it. But if the suffering is a result of loss of control via internal (or external) conflict, then MOL can help a lot by showing you how to get out of the conflict by “going up a level”.
As far as helping you experience “actual reality”, I think PCT would suggest that you just stay away from right wing media;-)
Best, Rick
Hi Andrew,
Welcome to the IAPCT discourse!
Not sure if I can answer your question. However, I could try by sharing my experience learning and “applying” PCT. Through PCT, I discovered The Method of Levels (MOL), a PCT based psychotherapy. I highly recommend you to read “The Method of Levels: How To Do Psychotherapy Without Getting In The Way” by Prof. Tim Carey. It definitely explains more than I am attempting here.
In the most simplified way of describing MOL and PCT, our perception control (which manifests in behaviours) are structured in a goal-hierarchy. When we have internal or psychological conflicts, MOL therapist suggests that we should go up a level by asking “why?” and you should have your answers to your conflicts. This concept has helped me to understand why I feel, for example, anxious about public speaking. When feeling anxious, PCT suggests it is the loss of control of a perception. So I ask, “why do I feel anxious about public speaking?” “Could it be the fear of other’s judgement?” “Could it be my lack of knowledge on the subject?” etc. I hold on to the anxiety and ask “why”. I slowly realise that my brain could go blank when public speaking and I would not know what to say. So, I practise and practise until I can confidently present my thoughts without even looking at my notes.
But going back to your question “How do I learn to apply PCT to my life?”, read loads, talk to people about it and try to apply in your daily thinking.
I dont think I have answered your questions and I apologise!
Hi Andrew and Alessin, Interesting question and views.
Briefly, “Ego” is simply “I”, the controlling organism itself. Yes there are a lot of different conceptions about it in philosophy and psychology, but for me at least this simple PCT informed understanding is the best. An organism contains a hierarchical control system and so the ego is not one entity, but has many layers and can contain internal conflicts. There is not necessarily and even probably only one highest level control unit determing the references for the whole system but also they can be many which can explain the high level conflicts like split personhood.
Tim Carey’s book about MOL therapy is downloadable here: https://www.livingcontrolsystems.com/download/MethodOfLevelsCarey2024.pdf
Eetu
I’ve started to read the online MOL book and also the book Controlling People. I’m learning a lot! Thank you Rick!
Thank you for the great response. I am beginning to read the MOL book online and also the Controlling People book. I’m starting to see PCT in everything.
I read Making Sense of Behavior many years ago and I’d love to find a used copy of B:CP when I can.
Thanks again for all the help!
Thank you also for the recommendation to read the MOL book. I’m really loving it so far. It’s very clear. I have no idea what the “ego” is other than what you’ve described. Thank you!
Thanks for the replies, Rick.
It seems to me that the phenomenon that ego seeks to control is the perception that my perceptions (on the whole) are as I desire, which translates to the reference of minimizing the total error.
EutuP,
What is the controlling organism other than the collection of reference levels which are compared to perceptions which behaviors control? This is why it seems to me that ego is just another, higher-level reference that controls for total system error.
Thanks for the recommendation of Carey’s MOL books. I’m currently reading his book, “The Method of Levels”, with the goal of better understanding the “reorganization system.” In it, he provides an example of conflict where Patrick wants to both sell his house now and later.
If it’s true that:
“For problems to be resolved, reorganization must occur at the appropriate place in the hierarchy. Conflicts endure when reorganization does not occur at the level that is creating the conflict.”
Then why would Carey say that:
“Reorganization is a random process that alters existing control systems.”
Reorganization seems to be anything but a random process, and it doesn’t appear to simply involve awareness of error but rather the conscious examination and reorganization of references.
Reorganisation is literally defined as a biologically intrinsic random process. It doesn’t depend on consciousness and it doesn’t change reference values directly.