Text item: Text_1
I was thinking about the business of "map recon" that Bill C. brought
up re: the chase through a snowy wilderness, and in a blinding flash
of insight I saw the obvious - that maps are models, and, like any
model, an abstraction of reality. The formal exercises used in the
martial arts are also abstractions (of conflict) and are therefore
also models. (Wow! It's amazing what happens when I drink good stuff
in the morning, rather than rogut.)
OK. Now if katas, maps, and symbolic representations of psychomotive
events are models, how are they related? ONE of the main things one
looks for in a model is its ability to aid imagination in preparing us
for a real experience. We practice katas to gain some level of
perception of actual conflict. We recon maps to gain some perception
of what a terrain may be. We study "models" in psychology, sociology,
and economics to gain some perception of.... Well, I'm not sure.
There IS a real terrain somewhere that matches the abstraction of the
map. An ACTUAL combat can be very close to the real thing.
(Hand-to-hand combat can be very much like kumite - practice fighting.
Or - Schwartzkopf ran an exercise called INTERNAL LOOK in April, May
& June, then fought the identical campaign in October through
January.) What do we get from models in social science. Can we
establish what makes a model good for anticipating a class of
perception, even though it may be lousy at reproducing A SPECIFIC
Economics fell into a hole in the thirties with the insistance that
all models be consistant with the concpt of competitive equilibrium -
even though noone could reproduce that beast except with the most
rediculous of constraints. It was the economic version of the Curia
dealing with Aritotelian versus Coperican astronomy. Economics became
ever more adept at discribing what had happened (in terms of deviation
from a ficticious condition) and almost totally inept in predicting
what MIGHT happen. Economists were like doctors who could describe
physiology and anatomy, but had no idea of kinesiology.
I think those of you are REAL SCIENTISTS working with PCT and S-R need
to make sure you don't fall into the same trap as did the economists.
What is the psychological sceiences version of the trap?