[from Gary Cziko 971102.2210 GMT]
Bill Powers recently directed me to the work of Ernst von Glasersfeld in
response to my query about Piaget vis-�-vis PCT.
In searching through the web I found a quote (appended) from von
Glasersfeld which I thought was a nice description of some aspects of
perceptual control.--Gary
···
============================================================
" As a metaphor - and I stress that it is intended as a
metaphor - the concept of an invariant that arises out of
mutually or cyclically balancing changes may help us to
approach the concept of self. In cybernetics this metaphor
is implemented in the 'closed loop', the circular
arrangement of feedback mechanisms that maintain a given
value within certain limits. They work toward an invariant,
but the invariant is achieved not by a steady resistance, the
way a rock stands unmoved in the wind, but by compensation
over time. Whenever we happen to look in a feedback loop,
we find the present act pitted against the immediate past,
but already on the way to being compensated itself by the
immediate future. The invariant the system achieves can,
therefore, never be found or frozen in a single element
because, by its very nature, it consists in one or more
relationships - and relationships are not in things but
between them.
If the self, as I suggest, is a relational entity, it cannot have
a locus in the world of experiential objects. It does not
reside in the heart, as Aristotle thought, nor in the brain, as
we tend to think today. It resides in no place at all, but
merely manifests itself in the continuity of our acts of
differentiating and relating and in the intuitive certainty we
have that our experience is truly ours."
Ernst von Glasersfeld - p.p.186-7: 'Cybernetics, Experience and the
Concept of Self.' [1970]
[From Bruce Gregory (71103.1700 EST)]
Rick Marken (971103.1430)
I don't think the Bible has anything at all to tell me about the
evolution of species; and I don't think James, Dewey, von Galsersfeld
or anyone else who has said PCT-like things without understanding
PCT has anything to tell me about purposive behavior.
Much as I share your views about PCT, I am reluctant to say that
only people who understand it have anything to tell me about
purposive behavior. After all, we are all purposive agents, even
if we didn't understand how we bring this off before Bill
explained it to us.
Bruce
[From Rick Marken (971103.1430)]
Gary Cziko (971102.2210 GMT) --
I found a quote (appended) from von Glasersfeld which I thought was
a nice description of some aspects of perceptual control.
I think von Glasersfeld's description of perceptual control seems
so nice to you because _you_ know all about perceptual control.
That's why you are able to see the importance of his distinction
between a rock's and a position controller's response to a
"disturbance" to position. But, as you know, I am not a fan of
trying to read an understanding of perceptual control into the
writings of people who clearly do not understand perceptual control.
The reason I don't like to do this is because it seems to tempt
people into thinking that there is then something to be _learned_
from these writings about perceptual control.
I think I might be able to get you to empathize with my point of
view by comparing what you did with von Glasersfeld and PCT to
what religious types do with Genesis and evolution. I have met
many people who accept both evolution and the Bible as God's word.
I don't think this is a rare combination. Anyway, these people
are fond of pointing out the similarity of the creation story to
the scientific story of evolution; in both there is an _ordering_
of creation and the order in Genesis isn't _that_ different from
the order in the fossil record. The point of this nonsense is to
convince the listener (me) that some great wisdom must have created
the Genesis story since its a story that reflects knowledge that
is way "ahead of its time". If such great wisdom informed Genesis
(even if it missed some of the details) then it must have informed
the rest of the Bible. So it's important for me to read and learn
from the author of the Bible.
I think the same kind of goal motiviates some of those (not you,
of course) who find PCT- like quotes in the writings of their
favorite thinkers. These peoples' goal is to show that, if a
particular thinker was wise enough to have said something that
could be construed as an anticipation of PCT, everything else that
thinker said must be worth paying attention to. I just don't buy it.
I don't think the Bible has anything at all to tell me about the
evolution of species; and I don't think James, Dewey, von Galsersfeld
or anyone else who has said PCT-like things without understanding
PCT has anything to tell me about purposive behavior.
Best
Rick
···
--
Richard S. Marken Phone or Fax: 310 474-0313
Life Learning Associates e-mail: rmarken@earthlink.net
http://home.earthlink.net/~rmarken