[From Rick Marken (2014.03.31.0950)]
Garett Howardson (2014.03.31.0827)
Hi Garett
It’s great to hear from young people getting into PCT!
You bring up some very interesting points! First, the role of
programming in learning PCT. Yes, programming helped me enormously,
but not the programming itself so much as being able to write the
interactive demos (back in 1979 on an Apple II) that blew my mind! So
for me, programming the demos was the egg that came before the chicken
of understanding PCT. Also, the demos that worked best for me (as far
as understanding PCT) were the demonstrations of the phenomena of
control. Programming also helped me learn the workings of the model,
but that came from writing control models that simulated the results I
got in the actual interactive demos. For me, it’s _phenomena
phirst_
Programming helped me understand the phenomenon of control,
as it is seen in actual behavior. And then it also helped me
understand how the model accounts for that phenomenon. But I think
you will have great leverage for understanding PCT now that you can
write your own programs in Javascript.
Second, my three year rule was pulled completely off the top of my
head, based on my own experience. The fact is, I still have plenty to
learn about PCT – that’s why it’s so much fun; the implications are
enormous – but I think I was getting the basics down pretty well
after about 3 years. Of course, people will vary in how long it takes
them to get to a good level of understanding. It partly has to do with
intelligence – and I’m not a particularly bright guy so it may have
taken me longer than others to get PCT. But more than intelligence I
think the time it takes to really get PCT depends on whether or not
one comes to PCT with an existing agenda. I think coming to PCT with
nearly any strongly held agenda (an agenda being a high level
perception that is controlled for with high gain) can be a problem but
the agendas that probably matter most in terms of understanding PCT
are existing beliefs about how behavior works and/or how it should be
understood (the appropriate theory of behavior). Since young people
like you (and like I was when I first came to PCT) are the least
likely to have such agendas (ones that are controlled for with high
gain), they are the most likely to understand PCT quickly and deeply.
So, again, it’s great to know that you are working on understanding
PCT. Please feel free to join in or initiate discussions on PCT (as
you just did;-). And if there is anything in existing CSGNet
discussions that you don’t understand please feel free to ask
questions. This isn’t a Jeopardy game with winners and losers. We’re
just trying to understand the controlling (purposeful behavior) done
by living systems. I think CSGNet is a wonderful resource for
learning PCT; it’s one I wish I had available when I was learning it.
Best regards
Rick
Hi everyone,
Most of what’s discussed on this list has been over my head but I feel like
I’ve learned quite a bit nonetheless. I just wanted to wanted comment
briefly on Rick’s “three years rule” as well as Adam’s "Intro to Javascript
(JS)." First, I’d say that I’m right on track for Rick’s three years. I’ve
been studying PCT for about two years primarily from Jeff Vancouver’s work
introducing it to applied psychology. I only now feel like I’m starting to
actually grasp the PCT complexities and it’s very exciting for me! I do
think that I was on pace for the three years rule, that is until Adam posted
his Javascript demo.
I learned to code in undergrad studying computer science for my minor
degree. I’ve tried to access the codes from previous demos but they’ve
either been in languages I don’t know and/or using software that I can’t
access for a number of reasons. I’ve also looked at “code” from various
modeling softwares, like Venism and I’ve seen the various equations in
multiple papers, but none of this seemed to “stick” until Adam posted his JS
demo, a language that I do understand. Suddenly, the PCT math and models
were in a language I could understand and then I made the connection between
multiple agents/loops/controlled perceptions/what-have-you and functions in
programming and it all just made sense to me; the various controlled
perceptions are functions that pass information back and forth dynamically
in the same manner that information is passed between functions in a dynamic
web program.
The point I’m trying to make is that learning to code and think programming
terms first really helped me start to understand the nuts and bolts of PCT.
I don’t think it’s a coincidence that most PCT-fluent people I’ve met also
know how to code and understand the basic rules of programming - I wonder,
however, if it’s the PCT or programming aspects that comes first? This also
makes me wonder if the “three years rule” might actually be expedited by
directly framing PCT more in computing terms rather than mathematics, at
least for beginners. Now that more and more people are learning to code at
any early age, this might actually increase the ease with which PCT is
communicated.
Now that I feel I grasp the parallels with programming, I can start
programming my own demos and tinkering with various parameters and observe
the effects firsthand as I make those changes, which I think is a great way
to learn. I just wanted to pass on my experience, for what it’s worth.
Best,
–
Garett Howardson
Doctoral Candidate
Department of Organizational Sciences
The George Washington University
600 21st St. Washington, DC
Programming helped me understand the phenomenon of control,