Introspection (was Brain teaser and/or Intensity-level)

CSGnet Archive CSG2001
21

[From Bruce Gregory (2001.0523.1002)]

Bill Powers (2001.05.22.1502 MDT)

And I'm suggesting that even in an adult human being, there may be some
sub-hierarchies that have fixed top reference signals not controlled by any
higher systems. I have suggested before that such isolated mini-hierarchies
would appear to the rest of the brain as little parasites, controlling some
variables in fixed states that the rest of the system has to learn to work
around.

Thanks. What still has me confused is why you objected to my claim that we
are always controlling for the highest level perception in any hierarchy.
If I have a system level perception (say it has been produced by
reorganization), am I not always controlling for this perception? (I may
not always be successful, but that is another story. It is also true that I
may not have a system level perception, but that too is another story.) We
cannot "choose" to control for a system level perception except by
reorganization, no?

BG

22

[From Bill Powers (2001.05.23.1022 MDT)]

Bruce Gregory (2001.0523.1002)]

What still has me confused is why you objected to my claim that we
are always controlling for the highest level perception in any hierarchy.

Perhaps I misunderstood you. I thought you were saying that any control
system in the brain must ultimately be part of some system-concept control
system. I think I agree that we are always controlling for system concepts.
However, if there are subhierarchies that end at lower levels, say the
principle level ("right and wrong"), they are not _necessarily_ part of any
system-concept control system.

If you define "any hierarchy" without regard to the nature of its highest
level, then your claim is by definition true. I took you to be talking
about the highest level _in the brain_, which is a different matter.

Best,

Bill P.