[From Oded Maler (980302) --
[From Rick Marken (980228.1220)]
Oded Maler (980228) --
You seem to be saying that it is impossible, in principle, to
determine what perceptions another person is controlling, particularly
if that person is controlling higher level perceptions. So far, I
am not convinced by your arguments. I am far more convinced by
clear, tangible demonstrations, like the "Coin Game" described in
B:CP, that it is possible, _in principle_ to determine what
perceptions a person is controlling. I am not saying it is easy
to do this Test; nor am I saying that success is guaranteed -- you
may never determine, to your own satisifaction, what variables
a person is controlling. But you have not convinced me (yet) that
determining controlled variables is impossible in principle.
Even in the idealized world of mathematics, when you want to deduce
the structure of a function f(x1,..,xn) from samples, given that
you know exactly what are the variables upon which is dependes
and you can manipulate them (which is far from being the case in
the physical and surely the psychical world) there are certain
limitation on what you can do. In some general settings it is
provably impossible, in a bit more restricting settings it is
possible *in principle*, which is rather unsatisfactory for mortals:
you can launch an interative process without any upper bound
to its convergence, all you know is that one day it will converge.
In more restrictive cases, you are guaranteed for a finite convergence
but with an unfeasible number of iterations, etc. These topics
are treated in domains such as Inductive inference, machine learning,
Estimation theory, System Identification, etc. I am not saying, *all*
of this is relevant, but even in this artificial settings it might
be very hard and practically impossible. Now whan you come to pereceptual
functions you do not know their form in yourself, do not know the important
variables..
> How much can someone from LA understand the mentality of someone
> from another part of the world
As much as they like, by using the Test for the controlled variable.
I guess this is the common view of your state department 
[...]
Ok. So apparently we differ only in terms of that last sentence.
You seem to think that the mistake of ignoring the closed loop
aspect of human behavior is important in "some domains" but not
in others. This is so vague that I could agree or disagree
depending on my interpretation. I have specifically said that
ignoring the closed loop aspect of human behavior is important
in one BIG domain with which I am familair -- the domain called
"experimental psychology"; the domain where behavior is studied
using the techniques described in textbooks on experimetal
methods in psychology. Do you disagree with me about this?
I never read a book on experimental psychology, and I don't know the
structure of academic psychology - for example how dominant are these
approaches among all researcher doing research related to human
behavior (cognitivist, neurologists, developmental, psychoanalysts,
psychophisicists, etc.). In other words, is the horse you are beating
really alive?
And what are these other 'inherent' limitations on scientific
psychology. Is your kvetch that there can't really be a scientific
psychology, even one based on a correct underdstanding of the
nature of control? If so, that would sure help explain a lot of
your behavior. Now that I think of it, that must, indeed, be one
of your controlled variables. I think you are controlling for
the idea that it is impossible to undertstand the human mind
scientifically. Is that it?
The inherent lmitations are those we were discussing all over, namely
the problematics of objective measurements of things which are
inherently subjective. To your question I'll respond with another: to
what extent do you think it is possible? Suppose all the psychological
community is converted and reeducated to the correct model. What will
be the main achievements after 50 years of research?
Regards,
--Oded
p.s.
There was no bet. Just disturbances. If what I suggested was not
disturbing then apparently you (like me) would like to see Israel
become a country for everyone who wants to live there, regardless
of religious or ethnic background. Great.
Sure, like the US
