[From Rick Marken (951017.2100)]
Bruce Abbott (951017.2110 EST) --u
my problem with the phrase "irrelevant side-effect" as a way to characterize
what researchers using "conventional methods" have been studying is that it
tends to suggest rather strongly that what these researchers study is
"irrelevant" in some more general sense; that it is uninteresting, useless,
a waste of time, unimportant.
Well, they may not be irrelevant in some more "general sense" but they are
certainly irrelevant in the specific sense that they are uninteresting,
useless, a waste of time and unimportant to people who want to understand
purposeful behavior. I think the phrase "irrelevant side effects of control"
communicates this fact rather nicely.
My argument and example were intended to show...that these phenemona are
far from uninteresting and that research on them is far from useless,
unimportant, "irrelevant."
There is no need to argue this; I agree completely. These phenomena (the
side effects of control) are extremely interesting to conventional
psychologists; indeed, THAT'S THE PROBLEM! The study of the side effects
of control is NOT useless, unimportant or irrelevant to conventional
psychologists; it can get you grants, income, fame, textbooks, tenure,
and people who treat you like you're real smart and stuff like that. The
study of the side effects of control is only useless, unimportant and
irrelevant to those of us who want to understand purposeful behavior.
I attempted to show instead that the simple observation of these
"irrelevant side-effects" could yield important insights as to the
nature of the control system whose behavioral actions are
being observed in these cases.
Well, I didn't notice you trying to _show_ that the simple observation
of side effects of control (like the "courtship rituals" of some birds)
"could yield important insights as to the nature of the control system
whose behavioral actions are being observed"; all I noticed was you trying
to _say_ this over and over. On the other hand, my "mind reading" demo
does _show_ that the simple observation of side effects of control (like
mouse movements or the pattern of movements of the numbers on the screen)
yields no insights at all about the nature of the control system whose
"behavioral actions" are being observed.
Maybe you could build a demo to show the kind of important insights
about a system that can be gained by studying the side effects of the
controlling done by this system.
Rick