Review of “Reconstructing Your World View �? by Bart Madden

wmansell · October 30, 2014, 8:44am

Hi Boris, I agree with you that Bill’s knowledge dwarfs Ricks! And I also believe in that Rick’s knowledge of modelling PCT dwarfs mine, and maybe even yours?!

But Bill is no longer with us and we just have each other. So let’s work together to distil Bill’s key messages, and be openly uncertain about the rest, pending further enquiry.

Let’s keep a steady steer on the PCT boat, despite the inevitability of conflict with all this collective control. Kent’s work tells us it is possible with enough resources and enough openness about our own (multi-levelled and sometimes outside awareness) goals!

Land ahoy!

Warren

···

On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 1:45 PM, Boris Hartman boris.hartman@masicom.net wrote:

HB: Well it’s obviously that it’s useless. You are dragging CSGnet to behaviorism and self-regulation . What you are proposin is almost the same as Carver and Scheier do. You are ignorant in comparison to Bill’s knowledge enormously. I don’t know how you will substitute Bill’s physiological,anathomical, mathematical, physical and probably saome more knowlegde, to understand that you are making a huge damage to PCT. As I said I’m only sorry for Bill’s daughter’s who maybe beleive your RCT. I hope they will Â»hireÂ« some experts to clear mess you made.

RM: Wow, pretty strong stuff. I don’t suppose you would be willing to explain just what I got so wrong, without all the name calling (behaviorism, self-regulation, Carver-Scheier, ignorant, huge damage to PCT). Here is your question and my answer again:

HB: I’m interested what it means to you first part of Bill’s definiton :

Â»Achievement and maintainance of a preselcted perceptual state in the controlling system….Â«

RM: It means bringing a perceptual variable, such as the perception of the vertical optical velocity of a Frisbee, to a reference or goal value, such as zero optical velocity, and keeping it at the value, as best as possible, protected from the effects of disturbance, such as changes in the vertical movement of the Frisbee itself.

RM: How about a nice, clear explanation of what is wrong with what I said. It would surely help your cause of getting others to see why they shouldn’t pay any attention to what I say about PCT.

Best

Rick

–
Richard S. Marken, Ph.D.
Author of Doing Research on Purpose.
Now available from Amazon or Barnes & Noble

dmg · October 30, 2014, 1:10pm

I agree with Warren.

David Goldstein

···

On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 1:45 PM, Boris Hartman boris.hartman@masicom.net wrote:

HB: Well it’s obviously that it’s useless. You are dragging CSGnet to behaviorism and self-regulation . What you are proposin is almost the same as Carver and Scheier do. You are ignorant in comparison to Bill’s knowledge enormously. I don’t know how you will substitute Bill’s physiological,anathomical, mathematical, physical and probably saome more knowlegde, to understand that you are making a huge damage to PCT. As I said I’m only sorry for Bill’s daughter’s who maybe beleive your RCT. I hope they will Â»hireÂ« some experts to clear mess you made.

RM: Wow, pretty strong stuff. I don’t suppose you would be willing to explain just what I got so wrong, without all the name calling (behaviorism, self-regulation, Carver-Scheier, ignorant, huge damage to PCT). Here is your question and my answer again:

HB: I’m interested what it means to you first part of Bill’s definiton :

Â»Achievement and maintainance of a preselcted perceptual state in the controlling system….Â«

RM: It means bringing a perceptual variable, such as the perception of the vertical optical velocity of a Frisbee, to a reference or goal value, such as zero optical velocity, and keeping it at the value, as best as possible, protected from the effects of disturbance, such as changes in the vertical movement of the Frisbee itself.

RM: How about a nice, clear explanation of what is wrong with what I said. It would surely help your cause of getting others to see why they shouldn’t pay any attention to what I say about PCT.

Best

Rick

–
Richard S. Marken, Ph.D.
Author of Doing Research on Purpose.
Now available from Amazon or Barnes & Noble

wmansell · October 30, 2014, 10:28pm

Hi Warren,

this is a nice message and I agree wtih you. But you have to tell also others to do their part. I tried nice and gentel (see the posts), and what did I get ? Selfish personal promotion. I’m sorry but I won’t serve as subject of manipulations.

I don’t know anything about who dwarfs who. But I know that I understand quite something about the organisms and after long talkings to Bill and some others on CSGnet, you can beleive me,I know what I’m talking about. Bill is really not with us, but his work is. And from time to time it’s good to remember what he said about something, not to read some Â»strange interpretationsÂ« of his work, which maybe even don’t resemble PCT.

I’m not sure what you meant with Â»steady steerÂ« on the PCT boat. Warren I try to keep steady steer of PCT boat. You should turn to those who are not.

I admire Kent’s work, and I think that we should cite him more. I beleive that cooperation is effective maybe more than conflict. So arguments and common agreement of arguments shoud prevail not writing of one man, as that is the only thing we should beleive.

I beleive that you are a good guy. But people are very different. There are also bad guys. So I’m sorry if I’ll make differences in atitude to them. Enough openness can sometimes cuase damagable consequences. Experiences show that we should be carefull.

Best,

Boris

···

From: csgnet-request@lists.illinois.edu [mailto:csgnet-request@lists.illinois.edu] On Behalf Of Warren Mansell
Sent: Thursday, October 30, 2014 9:45 AM
To: csgnet@lists.illinois.edu
Subject: Re: Review of â€œReconstructing Your World Viewâ€? by Bart Madden

Hi Boris, I agree with you that Bill’s knowledge dwarfs Ricks! And I also believe in that Rick’s knowledge of modelling PCT dwarfs mine, and maybe even yours?!

But Bill is no longer with us and we just have each other. So let’s work together to distil Bill’s key messages, and be openly uncertain about the rest, pending further enquiry.

Let’s keep a steady steer on the PCT boat, despite the inevitability of conflict with all this collective control. Kent’s work tells us it is possible with enough resources and enough openness about our own (multi-levelled and sometimes outside awareness) goals!

Land ahoy!

Warren

On 30 Oct 2014, at 00:09, Richard Marken rsmarken@gmail.com wrote:

[From Rick Marken (2014.10.29.1510)]

On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 1:45 PM, Boris Hartman boris.hartman@masicom.net wrote:

HB: Well it’s obviously that it’s useless. You are dragging CSGnet to behaviorism and self-regulation . What you are proposin is almost the same as Carver and Scheier do. You are ignorant in comparison to Bill’s knowledge enormously. I don’t know how you will substitute Bill’s physiological,anathomical, mathematical, physical and probably saome more knowlegde, to understand that you are making a huge damage to PCT. As I said I’m only sorry for Bill’s daughter’s who maybe beleive your RCT. I hope they will Â»hireÂ« some experts to clear mess you made.

RM: Wow, pretty strong stuff. I don’t suppose you would be willing to explain just what I got so wrong, without all the name calling (behaviorism, self-regulation, Carver-Scheier, ignorant, huge damage to PCT). Here is your question and my answer again:

HB: I’m interested what it means to you first part of Bill’s definiton :

Â»Achievement and maintainance of a preselcted perceptual state in the controlling systemâ€¦.Â«

RM: It means bringing a perceptual variable, such as the perception of the vertical optical velocity of a Frisbee, to a reference or goal value, such as zero optical velocity, and keeping it at the value, as best as possible, protected from the effects of disturbance, such as changes in the vertical movement of the Frisbee itself.

RM: How about a nice, clear explanation of what is wrong with what I said. It would surely help your cause of getting others to see why they shouldn’t pay any attention to what I say about PCT.

Best

Rick

–

Richard S. Marken, Ph.D.
Author of Doing Research on Purpose.

Now available from Amazon or Barnes & Noble