From [ Marc Abrams (2003.05.04.0740) ]
Purpose: Over the last few days on CSGnet I have had a terrific experience
in 
exchanges with Bruce N., Dick, Rick, Bill, and Bruce G. I certainly
can't speak for them and I am not attempting to, but I have found the
exchanges informative, thought provoking, and well thought out. So in this
post I am laying out some posting conventions and a glossary to help both
myself ( in structuring, and in trying to convey my intent to others ), and
others better "understand", and to help ease communication between myself
and others. This is not intended as a suggested standard for CSGnet. I
would like to think that whether you use this convention or one of your own
choosing is not important. I think using one is. Again, the exchanges over
the last few days has confirmed this to me. Some of the things will be
repeats of things I have said in prior posts. I am trying to consolidate. I
believe these conventions will help alleviate what I "perceive" to be major
road blocks to "communicating" on not only this list but all types of
"communicating" (i.e. the exchange and "understanding" of ideas among people )
This post was interrupted by a phone call to Bill. It is sufficient to say
that it was an extremely informative conversation, some of which I will
address in this post and others I will address in my next post on HPCT.
Most of what we talked about will be covered in the glossary, which was the
purpose of the phone call. It seems some of the "concepts" I have been
spouting of about the last couple of days have been _incomplete_. Not
wrong. Just incomplete. Bill straightened my tush out. Thank you Bill for a
most illuminating conversation
A final initial note to Rick. I was disappointed in the ending of our
thread. It takes two to communicate. Not one talking, and one listening. I
realized after the post that a _major_ problem I had was that Rick "sees"
and "understands" the real world in terms of the PCT model _only_ ; the
meanings and "understandings" of words Rick has are those of the model
(i.e. Technical ). _ALL_ other "definitions" and "understandings" are
"WRONG" ( whatever that means, I know of no model or Technical meaning for
"wrong" ). This presents _major_ problems for me. I ask Rick to think about
this. No reply is needed, wanted, or required.
***Alert*** In making another call to Bill to clarify a meaning we agreed
that I would hold off on starting a lexicon with this post. So you will not
see any words defined at the end of this post. _EVERYTHING ELSE IS STILL
VALID_. Bill is reviewing the glossary and the papers that I have cited in
this post.
Conventions:
1) I will use capital letters and _no_ quotes to specify Technical words or
phrases ( Technical being defined a little later in the post ) that are
used to explain the functioning of the HPCT model as described and defined
by Bill Powers in B:CP and other papers Bill has written. It's his model,
his words, so he gets to choose which ones represent which ideas. I would
hope that he would be open to both expansion of the glossary and revision
of the definitions ( in fact one has already been made by him that I am
aware of ).
example: Hierarchy, Imagining, Volition.
2) I will use quotes to represent "normative" descriptions and
definitions. That is, meanings and/or descriptions of words that have
meaning _other_ then the one used in the HPCT model. The difference with
Technical being that the "meaning" or "understanding" of the word is open
to interpretation at a very "basic level". (i.e. It's a word or phrase that
has many "common" definitions, interpretations or understandings.) and _my_
definition may not be _your_ definition. These words or concepts will
probably represent the points in the post that can bring about the most
misunderstandings. I am not suggesting by using these words that _my_
description or definition is the "correct" one. I will use the quotes to
signify words that in a particular _context_ are important to "understand"
the "idea" or "concept" I am trying to convey and might have multiple
"meanings" in this context. Where possible, I will make liberal use of
(i.e. .... ) to further help describe my intent. Remember, the purpose of
this is _not_ to set some sort of standard for the list, it is to
facilitate communication between myself and others.
I use the word "normative" rather then "normal" because, first of all, what
does "normal" mean? But more importantly, "normative" is used to signify a
word or phrase that has some "standard" _set_ of definitions in a
dictionary that are currently used in popular, common, or normal
communication.
example: "hierarchy", "imagining", "volition"
3) The purpose of the Technical and "normative" is to help differentiate
word/concept usage for better _understanding_ in net exchanges that involve
me, and to hopefully develop a lexicon of the HPCT/PCT science. Toward that
end I would like Bill to be the lexiconer (?sic) of PCT/HPCT. Bill is way
to humble ( and tired ) to take on the specific task of that job. But I
would like Bill to be the final arbitrator on the Technical definitions.
May I nominate ( big of me, isn't it ) Dr. Nevin as our chief
lexiconer. He can join Dag ( archivist ) and Rick (web master & chief PCT
demo maker :-)) as one of CSGnets leading citizens. How about it Bruce?
The purpose of the lexicon is to facilitate "understanding" of the PCT/HPCT
model and to hopefully, one day, having these definitions added to the
"normative" dictionary's in use.
4) I will be using, at times, either the Oxford English dictionary ( all 23
volumes ) or the Merriam-Webster Unabridged dictionary for the definitions
of most of my "normative" word meanings.
5) I will continue to use a *Purpose* statement. I will use it as a sort of
an *abstract* so the reader can decide right up front if they want to spend
the time reading the rest of post. I will not use this all the time. Only
when I feel it will help expedite the communication (i.e. conveying ) of my
ideas.
6) I will use the acronym HPCT in talking about the "cognitive"
model (i.e. the use of both the Hierarchy and Memory) of PCT. To me HPCT
and PCT represent different concepts. I do not believe they should be used
as synonyms for one another. ( just my thing :-))I feel this way about the
word and concept "goal" and Reference Level.
7) In fact, another reason for the Technical, "normative" convention is
that we should not mix and match Technical _definitions_ with "normative"
ones. It just mucks up the water.
8) Lots of "inquiry". (i.e. lots of exploratory questions). Although this
might become very time consuming I feel it necessary. I would rather do 1
"good" post a day the 10 "bad' ones. Of course not all posts and words need
to be examined ad nauseam. But important points should be examined.
Important being defined by the _reader_ not the sender.
Glossary;
These are words and phrases gotten from B:CP and 5 papers in _Living
Control Systems II_. Bill has tons of other literature out there as well as
other folks who have contributed to the literature, such as Rick, Tom B.,
Gary Z, Dick R, and others. As i said before, for time being I will leave
Bill as the final arbitrator on which words and phrase are or are not
considered to have Technical meaning. I don't know if Bill would care to
help develop a lexicon for the science of PCT/HPCT but I think it might be
worthwhile The 5 papers which I would strongly suggest reading in addition
to B:CP and the Glossary are;
1) 1972, _An Experiment with Levels_, Chap. 27 of a prelim version of B:CP
used for teaching a course at Northwestern University
2) 1974, _The Illusion of Control_, Unpublished manuscript
3) 1989 _Galileo_, Distributed at CSG meeting in 1989
4) 1989 _The Epistemology of the Control System Model of Human Behavior_
****** , Unpublished manuscript.
In my opinion this paper should be required reading for anyone truly
interested in "understanding" HPCT. I give it 5 stars. Not that the other
papers are shabby either.
5) 1989 _Human Nature from the Standpoint of Control Theory_, Unpublished
manuscript
It seems 1989 was a very good year for Bill :-), It also seems like very
few people have been exposed (3 unpublished papers ) to some of his ideas.
To bad.
I will not reproduce the entire B:CP glossary here. I will only examine
words and concepts that might apply to my discussion on HPCT and some
concepts and words that were clarified to me in my conversation with Bill.
I am going to use an asterisk to signify a word that is not currently
defined Technically but I think can be and should be.( i.e. a word that has
a _specific_ meaning or definition for the PCT/HPCT model.
The definitions are not always word for word from the B:CP glossary. They
are my interpretations of these definitions. After all I am trying to
convey my ideas.
I did not review the list of words with Bill. I would appreciate his review
and comments on this list.
Finally, the words in this list are not intended to be an exhaustive
attempt at defining all possible Technical words and phrases. This is an
initial effort to help my communication of ideas and concepts. The
Technical words listed here all have "normative" meanings that _could_
differ from the Technical definition.
To be continued ....