$#$#$#$#$#$#$#$#$#$ FROM CHUCK TUCKER 931109 $#$#$#$#$#$#$#$#$
WIPERS
I failed to make it clear that I was talking about the timer on
my wipers. My students have claimed that their wipers by using
the timer are a feedback system. I tell them to test this
by setting the timer on the wipers and pouring water on the wind-
shield to see if the wipers increase the wiping speed by taking
the water into account. After they get their car out of the
repair shop and return to class they admit that their wipers
do not work by feedback but are rather feedforward. [I do not
recommend that anyone try this "experiment" while driving on the
German Autobahn at any speed even the right lane where the trucks
are supposed to drive.]
WHAT IS MISSING WITH PCT?
It seems to me that we continue to have the same conversation
about PCT (or HPCT) because people don't understand how the
model can account for (deal with, make sense of, understand,
comprehend, explain, and the like) such experiences that we
put under the labels of ANTICIPATION, PREDICTION, PLANNING,
or HABIT. When illustrations are presented of what PCT (HPCT)
does not consider they all seem to be categorizable using
those labels. Then when we look very carefully and precisely
at a description of the physical actions that are involved in
those illustrations (e.g., walking across a dark room or across
the darkened room) and what is involved in the perceptual input
functions or processes it seems to me that they could not happen
without the person sensing his/her own actions (i.e, feedback).
But, more often that not, the person who initially suggested that
feedback was not involved does not deal again with his/her own
illustration. Thus, I am rarely able to say what the tentative
conclusions or even current impasse might be to a particular
thread. Of course, I finally decide which "side" of the
argument I accept but it would sure be nice to have the parties
come to an agreement on some of these issues.
Regards,
Chuck