PCT as science, not politics

[From Dag Forssell (940412 2245)] Rick Marken (940412.1900)]

My point was just that you are appealing to the controlling
nature of other people (managers in your case; educators in Ed's)
when you sell PCT as a theory that "works". For the manager,
"works" means that PCT is a tool that will allow him to produce
the perceptions he wants; perceptions that depend on people
behaving the right way. I know that PCT is likely to produce this
result as a "side effect" because it recognizes the autonomy of
others, the "legitimacy" of conflicts, and so on -- and this is
what you say about PCT; you are presenting it honestly. Ed too.
All I was saying is that the manager who wants things to "work" is
a controller too.

I think we agree on this.

And part of the solution to the manager's problem might be
something that he did not hire you to do -- to change HIS OWN
wants.

That is obvious from any explanation of PCT.

Are you going to tell the person who hired you, for example, that
a solution to his problem -- what works -- may be for him to be
willing to want a lower profit margin, or to want his salary to be
within 1% of that of his workers, etc etc.

It is not my place to tell him what to change in his wants. My job
is to teach PCT. He will change his wants if and when it fits his
understanding, values and priorities.

No way Jose. They want the big bucks and they want you to show
them how to get it. They want to be in control. Again, there's
NOTHING WRONG with that -- it just makes it a little tough for
these managers to get all gooey about PCT -- unless you are lucky
and they can achieve their current goals simply by being more
respectful of others. Apparently, one can get some milage out of
that; and that's fine.

You (and Bill P., in his eloquent post) demonstrate a prejudice
that apparently won't quit. By shouting your biases, prejudging
the "problems" my prospective students have, you come across as an
obnoxious fool. But your personal stored perceptions--whatever
gave rise to them--which cause you to hold anti-business political
convictions have nothing to do with teaching PCT, even though they
can be explained, using PCT. May the PCT god be kind to you so you
never have to hold a job in private industry. You might have to
adjust to limited degrees of freedom and make agreements, living up
to the standards of some boss, so you get the fat paycheck you
really want from an individual rather than a taxpayer subsidized
institution. (Businesses pay the taxpayers who subsidize the
institution). If you should suffer that horrible fate, PCT will
show you and your boss, both, what it takes to maximize your mutual
satisfaction. But you have to find a way to teach your boss, if
you want him and yourself to benefit as you know you both can. Why
should he want to listen to you? It could not possibly be in his
interest, could it?

I think it would be good for PCT and the net if Rick Marken could
separate his political agenda, as a representative for the
oppressed, from the task of teaching PCT as a science that offers
impartial understanding of what is. I am hopeful that that might
remove the need for these confrontations.

Best, Dag

[From Rick Marken (940413.1530)]

Dag Forssell (940412 2245) --

I'm baaaaak.

Me:

Are you going to tell the person who hired you, for example, that
a solution to his problem -- what works -- may be for him to be
willing to want a lower profit margin, or to want his salary to be
within 1% of that of his workers, etc etc.

Dag:

It is not my place to tell him what to change in his wants. My job
is to teach PCT. He will change his wants if and when it fits his
understanding, values and priorities.

I was not saying that you should tell anyone to change their wants; I
just was saying that I don't see this aspect of PCT (which I
think is very important) emphasized in your advertising, nor is it
emphasized in your teaching (as I recall). I'm not saying that you
should emphasize it either; what you do is up to you, of course.

You (and Bill P., in his eloquent post) demonstrate a prejudice
that apparently won't quit. By shouting your biases, prejudging
the "problems" my prospective students have, you come across as an
obnoxious fool.

Well, I post me posts and takes me chances. I guess I'm still a little worse
off than Bill P., though, since he's just an obnoxious fool; I'm a tactless,
obnoxious fool.

But your personal stored perceptions--whatever gave rise to them--which
cause you to hold anti-business political convictions have nothing to do
with teaching PCT, even though they can be explained, using PCT.

I don't care for greedy, selfish, tricky people. Some are business people;
some are not. I'm not anti business; I'm anti creepiness towards other
people. There happen to be an inordinately large number of such creeps in
business management -- but there are plenty in academia and other places I've
been, too.

May the PCT god be kind to you so you never have to hold a job in private
industry. You might have to adjust to limited degrees of freedom and make
agreements, living up to the standards of some boss, so you get the fat
paycheck you really want from an individual rather than a taxpayer subsidized
institution. (Businesses pay the taxpayers who subsidize the
institution).

I have worked in private industry (for Honeywell, for example) and so has my
wife. I find it to be absolutly no different than the "ivory tower" that
"private business" types are always scoffing at. I've had to live up to
"standards" to get tenure at Augsburg (a PRIVATE, religious college, by the
way), to stay on contract at Honeywell, to stay employed at Aerospace. So I
have worked for (and paid taxes with money earned from) the businesses that
pay for the business I now work for (I will ignore for the moment that much
if not most of the income of the private business with which I deal every day
-- IBM, Lockheed, TRW, Loral, etc -- comes from government contracts. Are
these still private industries?).

I think it would be good for PCT and the net if Rick Marken could
separate his political agenda, as a representative for the
oppressed, from the task of teaching PCT as a science that offers
impartial understanding of what is.

My comments were not based on a political agenda. Let me try to make my point
again, but this time translated into Republican:

Are you going to tell the person who hired you, for example, that
a solution to his problem -- what works -- may be for him to be
willing to want a GREATER profit margin, or to want his salary to be
10,000 times that of his workers, etc etc?

You are right that, simply by teaching PCT you are implicitly showing that
one way for the CEO to solve his problems is by changing his own wants. But
why not be explicit about it? After all, by teaching PCT you are also
implicitly showing the CEO that his employees should be treated with respect;
but you are EXPLICITLY saying this in your articles, advertisements, etc.
Why not just leave that implicit too?

I think the reason you are not explicit about it is because you know that
the CEO hired you to help him achieve PARTICULAR goals of his; if you say
that he MIGHT consider changing his own goals -- including, possibly, the
goals that led him to hire you -- you are just talking yourself out of a
job, right? It's like getting hired to build a bridge for someone and,
instead of building the bridge (or while building it) trying to get the
person who hired you to think about whether he really wants to get to the
other side. Yet PCT is in this (unfortunate, perhaps) position because
willingness to change ones own goals in order to achieve otehr goals
(variable means to to produce consistent ends) is a BIG part of what PCT is
about.

I understand why you are getting upset about this; it must seem like I'm
telling you to be unsuccessful in you efforts to get CEOs to want to learn
PCT. But I want you to be successful -- and I don't expect you to make a big
thing out of the CEOs POSSIBLY changing their own goals; if they take your
course they actually might be able to figure this out, and that would be
great. Even if they don't figure it out, it would be great if the CEO just
went about trying to achieve his own goals by treating people with respect
(which is basically what you say that your program is about). I'm all for
it; I think your program is great; and I think it will be wonderful for
everyone in the companies you deal with (from the CEO on down) if they just
learned to deal with others with respect; in order to do this, they would
HAVE to do (as you say) what I am suggesting; they would have to sometimes be
willing to change their OWN goals in order to achieve other goals.

Peace brother.

Best

Rick