<Bob Clark (940614.2210 EDT)>
Welcome back from the UK! Hope it was an interesting and productive
trip!
Bill Powers (940605.1400 MDT) Subject: Templates & memory; Control of
uncertainty
After quoting from Bob Clark (940605.1412 EDT) Subject: RKC-CONSCIOUS
CONTROL:
*Here I am concerned with the operation of the two switches
*described in B:CP, Figure 15.3. Conscious attention is necessary
*for changing their settings. In brief, conscious attention is
*necessary for "control" of these two switches.
You ask:
Why? Why can't the positioning of the switches be part of the
normal and automatic operation of higher-level control systems?
Of course, that is usually the case. As I noted in my post referred
to above:
*Most everyday situations are readily handled by the learned systems
*without requiring any special attention.
But there are times and situations where switching is needed. Some
other "controller" is needed somewhere.
In the absence of such unusual situations, most adult humans seem
have learned methods that are adequate for resolution of ordinary
problems.
In addition, the higher-level control systems cannot operate the
switches located above their own level. And the operation of the
switches above the highest existing order remains unanswered.
As I also pointed out in my same post:
*Conscious attention to the control of these two switches is only
*needed when the operating systems are "stuck." Perhaps some form of
*conflict has developed. A branch-point may be lacking a
*pre-established alternative. Some unplanned action(s) may be
*needed.
How do _you_ account for changing those switches located at the
highest level?
Regards, Bob Clark