From Erling Jorgensen (981104.1757)
[Bill Powers (981028.0631 MDT) ] & other posts since re: events
I've always thought of the "Events level" (if it exists) as a matter
of framing. In other words, an arbitrary beginning and end is
inserted into the continuous flow of transitions, and certain actions
are seen _as if_ they are discrete "behaviors". [In terms of who
inserts these frames, it's the same who that constructs perceptual
input functions -- presumably "random reorganization and selective
retention of what works," perhaps with some genetic constraints on
what pif's are possible to construct.]
This is be one of the levels the EAB folks seem to revel in --
which is evidence in my mind that humans, at least, can construct
and perceive/control events. Whether that is done by other
organisms, or whether they can construct relationships, sequences,
etc. without such a framing input function, remains to be seen.
You make a good point, Bill, that what the rat is perceiving and
doing may be very different from what the researcher/observer is
perceiving and doing.
If it makes sense to retain an Events level in the hierarchical
model, it offers one/(the?) place where perceptions may be converted
from an analogue form to a discrete form, to make possible certain
higher level perceptions.
Just a few thoughts to add to the thread.
Erling