[From Chris Cherpas (2001.05.16.1030 PT)]
Richard Kennaway (2001.05.16.1754 BST)--
...Introspection is not a part of the model (unless incidentally,
if one attempts to think up a way that the phenomenon of
introspection might arise in a hierarchical arrangement of
control loops).
No, I haven't worked it out (yet), but my introspections lead
me to believe that eventually introspection will become part
of the model. I think the trick that makes consciousness seem
to be outside of the perceptual hierarchy may involve 3 things:
1) we control perceptions of ourselves;
2) we control separate perceptions of (parts of) ourselves
as both perceiver and perceived (whose control we may
first acquire in the context of interactions with other people);
3) the gain in the control loops of these pairs of self-perceptions
rises and falls in a reciprocal relation, and with such fluidity and
rapidity, that we usually ignore their being separate.
We can therefore maintain a self-perception as a stable,
separate consciousness that is outside the closed system,
although this is fraught with error that is especially difficult
to resolve when such introspection is carried to an "infinite regress."
Best regards,
cc
i.kurtzer (2001.05.16.1700EST)
[From Chris Cherpas (2001.05.16.1030 PT)]
I think the trick that makes consciousness seem
to be outside of the perceptual hierarchy may involve 3 things:
1) we control perceptions of ourselves;
2) we control separate perceptions of (parts of) ourselves
as both perceiver and perceived (whose control we may
first acquire in the context of interactions with other people);
3) the gain in the control loops of these pairs of self-perceptions
rises and falls in a reciprocal relation, and with such fluidity and
rapidity, that we usually ignore their being separate.
Could you elaborate on two and three? Possibly, these could be cashed out
in terms of a prediction, particularly on the claim of reciprocal-gain.
It sounds interesting.
i.
[From Bruce Gregory (2001.0516.1433)]
i.kurtzer (2001.05.16.1700EST)
Could you elaborate on two and three? Possibly, these could be cashed out
in terms of a prediction, particularly on the claim of reciprocal-gain.
It sounds interesting.
Since apparently you can understand (1), perhaps you'll explain it to me.
At what level in the hierarchy is "a perception of ourselves"? Or is this
not part of the hierarchy? Thanks.
BG
i.kurtzer (2001.05.16.1745)
[From Bruce Gregory (2001.0516.1433)]
>i.kurtzer (2001.05.16.1700EST)
Since apparently you can understand (1), perhaps you'll explain it to me.
At what level in the hierarchy is "a perception of ourselves"? Or is this
not part of the hierarchy? Thanks.
I was assuming that Chris meant "system concept". An example of that, to my
understanding, would be "father". Subordinate to this are principles,
program, and so on.
i.
[From Bruce Gregory (2001.0516.1536)]
i.kurtzer (2001.05.16.1745)
[From Bruce Gregory (2001.0516.1433)]
>
> >i.kurtzer (2001.05.16.1700EST)
> Since apparently you can understand (1), perhaps you'll explain it to me.
> At what level in the hierarchy is "a perception of ourselves"? Or is this
> not part of the hierarchy? Thanks.
I was assuming that Chris meant "system concept". An example of that, to my
understanding, would be "father". Subordinate to this are principles,
program, and so on.
O.K. So from your understanding we can reformulate (1) to say: "self" is a
controlled perception at the level of system. That makes sense. I'll wait
for Chris's clarification of the meaning of (2) and (3) to see what this
has to do with introspection.
BG
[From Kenny Kitzke (2001.05.16.1930EDT)]
<Bruce Gregory (2001.0516.1536)>
<So from your understanding we can reformulate (1) to say: "self" is a
controlled perception at the level of system. That makes sense.>
It makes little sense to me. Two years ago at CSG Conference, I passed out a
paper called something like "The Twelfth Level." I am too tired to look it
up. 
But, as I recall it speculated that there are levels of perception higher
than Level 11: Systems. Level 12 could easily be "self" realization. I
reasoned this way. Ken Kitzke is a:
father
Penguins hockey fan
nuclear engineer
management consultant
PCT devotee
Christian, etc.
I think these are all system level reference perceptions. When combined,
they all make me, a unique human being different from all other living
things, one which I an others can perceive.
As I recall, Rick Marken responded favorably to my speculation when discussed
on the CSGNet. Personally, based on introspection, I feel this and even
higher levels of perception exist and are essential to understanding human
behavior and their unique nature among living things.
By HPCT not acknowledging such higher levels of perception in our human
nature, I believe that PCT will always fall short of satisfactorily
explaining why humans do what they do and will limit its acceptance as a
significant and useful life science until someone smarter than I can
structure appropriate scientific experiments and discover useful
applications.
[From Bruce Gregory (2001.0516.2007)]
Kenny Kitzke (2001.05.16.1930EDT)
But, as I recall it speculated that there are levels of perception higher
than Level 11: Systems. Level 12 could easily be "self" realization.
Sure, why not. The more the merrier!
BG