[From Bill Powers (2002.06.16.0734 MDT)]
Bill, I've been very grateful over the years of receiving CSGNet for your
clear analysis of the simplicity of a control system in operation. I've
built up a huge file of them. Your last one continues this pattern.
However, one old piece of learning from my neurophysiology research days in
Gothenburg which focussed on ascending sensory pathways, leaves me
wondering. As I remember it there were two pathways for "pain", a fast and
slow. The fast one got you to withdraw your hand from the hot stove, the
slow on, to feel the pain.
David Wolsk
Victoria, B.C. (where the provincial government keeps inflicting the pain)
[From Bill Powers (2002.06.16.1357 MDT)]
David Wolsk (2002.06.16) --
>As I remember it there were two pathways for "pain", a fast and
slow. The fast one got you to withdraw your hand from the hot stove, the
slow on, to feel the pain.
Could there be two kinds of error from injuries, a quick sensory error that
goes away as the immediate stimulation goes away, and a deeper error that
reflects longer-term damage? Once you drop the label "pain," you have to
ask what kind of information is carried by a pathway, and understand the
experience in terms of what is being sensed. Of course there's nothing
wrong with saying you're experiencing pain, but once we get rid of the
idea of generalized pain receptors, all that's left to mean is the
experience of much too much signal of whatever kind it is. I probably
haven't convinced Bruce A. yet (if I ever will), but it's nice to get an
echo of understanding.
Best,
Bill P.