From [Marc Abrams (2005.02.10.1829)]
Don’t worry folks, this will be a short visit. I unsubscribed and then decided to post one last time before moving on.
I wrote the post the morning before getting the threat from Bill, and I see martin responded so I will be following this post with a response to that.
I will then be gone. Anyone wanting to respond to either post may contact me directly and anyone on CSGnet interested may join my Yahoo list by contacting me. It is open to all, including Ken Kitzke, Rick Marken, and Brian Thalhammer. Powers can kiss my ass.
···
From [Marc Abrams (92005.02.10.0850)]
My final gripe has to do with the way dialogue takes place here on CSGnet. Or more accurately, has it DOESN’T take place, and it takes this in TWO forms. One, is that the discourse often become contentious and unproductive and second people simply refuse to post, NOT because, as Kenny would have you believe, by my bad language, but because their ideas are not listened to and responded to with any respect or interest.
That is of course unless you talk about idea’s that Powers favors. This is HIS list isn’t it?
Actually, I was under the mistaken impression it was a list about PCT. But I guess the ‘P’ stands for Powers, not Perceptual. Oh well, we can all make mistakes.
I will admit that I have been a part of the communication problem. But I am also willing to say that something can be and should be done about it, and I don’t mean blocking people’s posts and kicking people off the net.
Being part of a workable solution is a great deal more difficult then admitting to being part of the problem, but it’s a start.
As most of you know, I am largely a self educated individual and it is probably because of this fact that I can relate this story. In going to school, one tends to think about ‘finishing’ a sequence of required courses and in doing so acquiring the necessary ‘required’ knowledge with regard to that subject in order to get some sort of ‘certification’.
My experience is a bit different. Unconcerned about the needs or desires of where somebody or what somebody else believes I should ‘know’ about a subject I am free to roam as I may.
It has it’s advantages as well as a few disadvantages. Although ‘free’, I tend to look toward the Internet sites of college courses I am interested in, and buy the necessary texts and follow he curriculum. As a student of Empire State College, I have access to the SUNY library and it’s research database, as well as subscribing to a number of journals.
I consider myself a great deal more informed then some of my formally educated friends.
When I acquire a new bit of understanding or knowledge on a subject, what I tend to understand the most about it is that I actually know very little about the subject I just learned about. And the more I ‘learn’ about the subject the more I realize I don’t know, until I finally realize that even if I had 10 lifetimes, I could not acquire all the knowledge existing in any one field, even if I read 1,000 books a day. And of course the real kicker here is about how much is not even known in any book by any one yet.
So, if I believe this to be true, and I most certainly do, then how much hubris would it take on my part to think that others have no useful knowledge that I can use, or had no useful experiences that might bring some clarity or better understanding on any given subject to me?
You see, I understand how absolutely IGNORANT I am on most subjects and how much I can learn from others IF I allow myself to be open enough to listen to idea that at times might even be strange, but in time make sense.
How many of you have had the experience of reading a book, a second, third, and fourth time, and each time getting new and exciting information out of the reading because you brought some new understanding to the topic and see things a bit differently now then you did the last time you read the book. This is one reason I am extremely reluctant to part with any book.
It drives my wife crazy and she says we might be better off moving to the NY public library where we might have more living space. 
But we all have out own nonsense to deal with.
So Bill, your petty attempts at trying to attack my educational background while being unable to respond to either my ideas or criticisms is LAME and those whose opinions I value tend to value mine as well, regardless of my background.
Which brings me to my final point;
We should all be on a mission of discovery here. That is, trying to go from a place we think we have some ideas about (PCT the THEORY) to a place that we have no ideas about ( EMPIRICAL PCT). This will require a leap in faith because Empirical PCT can NEVER, EVER be known with certainty until we are certain about why we are all here and how we got here.
These are questions you and I will never answer. The best we can hope for is to work toward a theory that makes sense and provides clarity and useful information to others and ourselves, but the work and knowledge will ALWAYS be in the domain of probabilities and uncertainty. At least for us.
If this is so, how can all move forward individually and as a group?
I believe the techniques of ‘argumentation’ might provide a glimmer of hope.
Argumentation is about a structured approach to ‘arguing’, or ‘reason giving’.
Reason giving is the practice of providing reasons to justify any claims presented for the purpose of seeking the adherence of an audience. Whether it be one other person or a million folks in TV audience.
Gaining adherence is the ONLY reason we argue with anyone
Argumentation is about a cooperative approach to exchanges that allow for the sharing of knowledge.
It provides a means for productive rather than unproductive exchanges, but it is not a simple thing to pull off.
A key element for success is the need for the party’s involved to have the willingness and capacity to change a belief given the proper evidence, and to back away from a claim that has been shown to be ‘weak’.
For some this is NOT an easy thing to do, and as control systems we do not like our belief systems challenged.
I wouldn’t expect CSGnet to be able to adopt this notion entirely, but you folks might want to consider adopting some rules, and most importantly try to encourage dialogue and new ideas, even if they run counter to prevailing wisdom.
It’s been a gas, thanks for the ride,
Marc