Serious questions?

Please forgive me for jumping in the middle of a thread after lurking for so
long. Is there any other way? Have to jump in some time :slight_smile:

IRT the question of why anybody would turn to science to discover the meaning
of life or the nature of humans, Rick answers: "because it works so well."

Then he asks, "Why would anyone -- especially someone who understands
science--
turn to anything other than science to discover _anything_?"

Is this a serious question, Rick?

How does science answer the meaning of life? Are you talking about Astrology
or sciences like like that? How does PCT answer the meaning of life? I can
see how PCT would answer the "nature of humans" aspect pretty well...though
not completely. When you say "works so well," I take it you admit science
falls short of working 100% in some areas? And the reason why? Because we
aren't finished or haven't done enough experiments? Really, we turn to our
perceptions of what we think science or anything else can answer in order to
get the answers we want...am I right?

Curious Chris

[From Rick Marken (991012.0820)]

Chris Kitzke(991012?) --

Then he asks, "Why would anyone -- especially someone who
understands science-- turn to anything other than science
to discover _anything_?"

Is this a serious question, Rick?

Very.

we turn to our perceptions of what we think science or
anything else can answer in order to get the answers we
want...am I right?

Yes. In science, we set up experiments to answer the question
"Will we see what the model predicts?". If the experiment is
conducted properly we will get the answer we _want_ -- but it
may not be the answer we _like_. For example, we may find that
we _don't_ see what the model predicts. This may not be an
answer we like, but it is the answer we want.

Best

Rick

···

--
Richard S. Marken Phone or Fax: 310 474-0313
Life Learning Associates mailto: rmarken@earthlink.net
http://home.earthlink.net/~rmarken

[From Bruce Gregory (991012.1132 EDT)]

Rick Marken (991012.0820)

Yes. In science, we set up experiments to answer the question
"Will we see what the model predicts?". If the experiment is
conducted properly we will get the answer we _want_ -- but it
may not be the answer we _like_. For example, we may find that
we _don't_ see what the model predicts. This may not be an
answer we like, but it is the answer we want.

Elegant.

Bruce Gregory

[From Bjoern Simonsen (991012. 22:30 EU-time)]

[From CKitzke@AOL.COM (???)]

How does science answer the meaning of life? Are you talking about Astrology
or sciences like like that? How does PCT answer the meaning of life?

For me PCT provides me with what I consider to be a
nice, solid approach to answering my questions about existence.

In this context “meaning of life” is the sum of the goals i have set for myself…

And of course I respect the goals everybody choose for themself.

My “job” here on earth is to control my perceptions.

And for me " happines in life" is the degree I succeed to control my perceptions.

Thats all. So simple is life - for me.

Bjoern

E-mail bsimonse@c2i.net

[From Bill Powers (991013.0643 MDT)]

Bjoern Simonsen (991012. 22:30 EU-time)--

Oops, now that I see my "reply" screen I realise you've sent your message
in HTML instead of ASCII. Big hunks are missing and the printout for Mary
is going to look wierd. I'll try to lift the quote from the original and
put in the > marks by hand.

In this context "meaning of life" is the sum of the goals i have set for
myself..
And of course I respect the goals everybody choose for themself.
My "job" here on earth is to control my perceptions.
And for me " happiness in life" is the degree I succeed to control my
perceptions.

Lovely, Bjoern. The purpose of life is whatever we decide it is to be, for
ourselves. So it would be a good idea to pick one, if you want one.

Best,

Bill P.

[From Bjoern Simonsen(991013.23:36 EU-time)]

[From Bill Powers (991013.0643 MDT)]

....... The purpose of life is whatever we decide it is to be, for
ourselves. So it would be a good idea to pick one, if you want one.

Your last sentence is some problematic.

Some months ago Mark Abrams wrote about SD - MOL.And his writings engaged me. I find it easy (after 1 - 2 years studying PCT) to use PCT for myself.
That is because I can describe my own goals, what I perceive and my behavior.
It is feasible to pic one goal for myself and to control my perceptions in harmony with actual reference levels. It is feasible for myself to change behavior. I think it is easier for myself to change my personality than people mostly think.

In counseling situations I am Client Centered an PCT orientated. (I am glad Carl Rogers has been a CSG-er). And my counseling is grounded on the idea that my clients have to decide for themselves what goals the will choose.
This is understandable for most people. But I too often experience that the same people expect a hocus-pocus, a pill, or something like that so their behavior can be changed. They expect a S-R or a cognitive routine.
When we talk about controlling their perceptions they often turn away.

Sitting back I often think about people as monkeys. They are satisfied with their S-R behavior. It is adjacent to think about two groups of people. One group is the group who pick a goal and who does something to maintain or to change their behavior.
The other group is the group who doesn't pick up goals because they dont want to.

It is adjacent to think that S-R psychology or cognitive psychology govern their lives.
That is wrong. They also control their perceptions, unconsciously.
Nobody live lives governed by S-R or cognitive psychology.Everybody _control their perceptions_ and they often talk big about that they _control their behavior_.

My dilemma is that I wish to help people to change behavior (get an other job, stop smoking, reduce weight and more), and they wish to change behavior themselves.But they dot believe that they have to control their perceptions. And therefor they dont succeed when they try to change behavior.

Is it only I who have this dilemma?

PS. Do anybody know or has anybody read about Paul G. Thomas. He wrote a book "Psychofeedback. Practical Psychocybernitics". He was the one who opened my eye for Robert Wieners thinking.
Bjoern

I manage what I choose

E-mail bsimonse@c2i.net

[From Dick Robertson,991014.0740CDT]

Bjoern Simonsen wrote:

[From Bjoern Simonsen(991013.23:36 EU-time)]

In counseling situations I am Client Centered an PCT orientated. (I am glad Carl Rogers has been a CSG-er). And my counseling is grounded on the idea that my clients have to decide for themselves what goals the will choose.

Hils Bjoern,

Do you know Leif Braaten? He was at Rogers' center when I was.

Best, Dick R.

···

[From Kenny Kitzke (991014. 1400EDT)]

<Bjoern Simonsen (991012. 22:30 EU-time)>

<For me PCT provides me with what I consider to be a

nice, solid _approach_ to answering my questions about existence.>

And, before you learned of PCT, what approach did you use to answer your
questions about existence?

<In this context "meaning of life" is the sum of the goals i have set for
myself..>

Fine, if that's what you want. How did PCT help you set goals for yourself
that are any better or different from before? People who never heard of PCT
could and do set goals and say similar things about their wants in life, no?

<My "job" here on earth is to control my perceptions.>

Before you knew about PCT, what did you think your "job" on earth was? You
do believe that you always controlled your perceptions anyway, don't you? Me
and my dog is doing his "job" on earth too just like you then, right?

<And for me " happines in life" is the degree I succeed to control my
perceptions.>

And, just how happy are you would you say? Do you have any goals you are not
controlling for at a very high degree of success? Can you share any goal
like that, if its not too personal a question?

<Thats all. So simple is life - for me.>

I am happy for you that your life is simple. Many people are stressed out
and in conflict much of their waking hours because life is not simple at all
for them. Each day is a hassle. Some want to lash out or kill themselves.
The need for psychologists/therapists seems to be growing here in the USA.
How about in your country?

Was life more complex for you before having a PCT approach?

Thanks for you feedback.

[From Bill Powers (991014.1147 MDT)]

Bjoern Simonsen(991013.23:36 EU-time)--

....... The purpose of life is whatever we decide it is to be, for
ourselves. So it would be a good idea to pick one, if you want one.

Your last sentence is some problematic.

You're too sharp. Yes, I don't think we can just "pick one." But we can
notice the lack of one and feel bad about it and reorganize. Maybe at these
high levels, when we reorganize we pick among possibilities we have heard
about opr otherwise experienced, looking for a reference condition that
works better than the ones we have (or don't have). So to some extent it
could be that previous experience and the social surroundings have an
influence -- maybe not an influence on the selection process, but at least
an influence on what is there to be selected from.

Some months ago Mark Abrams wrote about SD - MOL.And his writings engaged

me. I find it easy (after 1 - 2 years studying PCT) to use PCT for myself.

That is because I can describe my own goals, what I perceive and my behavior.
It is feasible to pic one goal for myself and to control my perceptions in

harmony with actual reference levels. It is feasible for myself to change
behavior. I think it is easier for myself to change my personality than
people mostly think.

Could be. I defer to those who have actual non-electronic interactions with
other people to use as data.

Best,

Bill P.

[From Bjoern Simonsen(991013.23:36 EU-time)]

My dilemma is that I wish to help people to change behavior (get an other
job, stop smoking, reduce weight and more), and they wish to change behavior
themselves.But they dot believe that they have to control their perceptions.
And therefor they dont succeed when they try to change behavior.

Is it only I who have this dilemma?

I would like to talk to you about this dilemma but I don't have a lot of time
to write an essay on it. If you what to know and talk more about it with me
-- Please call me at
602-956-1936 or
602-418-4260

Mark Lazare M.A. (Tom Bourbon was/is my mentor at STASU)

My Bio

Has over five years experience in emergency crisis interventions and
assessments. He performs training and seminars on assessing dangerousness of
clients, to self and others, and involuntary commitment laws, Title 36,
Article, 4, related to COE and COT orders. His Masters thesis was:
"Prediction of Human Behavior, A Perceptual Control Systems Analysis, ". He
has completed the "Mitchell Model" training of Critical Incident Stress
Management. He has received training in "Multidisciplinary Protocol on Child
Abuse Investigation." He can act as a resource person for questions
regarding the, Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA
statute). He has demonstrated competency in age specific counseling per the
requirements of JACHO accreditation.

[From Rick Marken (991014.2210)]

Mark Lazare (991014) --

My dilemma is that I wish to help people to change behavior
(get an other job, stop smoking, reduce weight and more),
and they wish to change behavior themselves. But they dot
believe that they have to control their perceptions. And
therefor they dont succeed when they try to change behavior.

I don't agree with your conclusion. These people are not
having problems becuase they don'tbelieve that they have
to control their perceptions. They are having problems
because they are in _conflict_; they want to change and
they _don't_ want to change. If they just wanted to change
(get an other job, stop smoking, reduce their weight, etc.)
they would "just do it", whether they believed that they have
to control their perceptions or not.

What you call a "dilemma" is actually internal conflict; higher
level control systems in these people are trying to control
perceptions by setting lower level references that demand
changing jobs and staying in the same job, smoking and
not smoking, staying the same weight and losing weight, etc.
I know becuase I've been there.

I think your job, as a therapist, is to help these people
"go up a level" or two to see how they are creating these
conflicts for themselves. That is, I think this is a job
for the method of levels (MOL).

Best

Rick

···

--
Richard S. Marken Phone or Fax: 310 474-0313
Life Learning Associates e-mail: rmarken@earthlink.net
http://home.earthlink.net/~rmarken/

[From Bjoern Simonsen (991016.09:00 EU-time)]

[From Bjoern Simonsen (991012. 22:30 EU-time)]

[From Kenny Kitzke (991014. 1400EDT)]

For me PCT provides me with what I consider to be a
nice, solid _approach_ to answering my questions about existence.>

And, before you learned of PCT, what approach did you use to answer your
questions about existence?

Of course I used the same theory, -without knowing it.
_Carrying a stone under water was more easily before Archemedes served us with his theory_.

In this context "meaning of life" is the sum of the goals i have set for
myself..>

Fine, if that's what you want. How did PCT help you set goals for yourself
that are any better or different from before? People who never heard of PCT
could and do set goals and say similar things about their wants in life, no?

Maybe I am wrong, but I still is of that opinion that "meaning of life" is the sum of the goals i have set for myself is common or universal for most people.
Also for you.
Am I wrong postulating that a part of your "meaning with life" is to supply the reorganization segment of PCT with a twelft level wish describes the creators will.

If this is universal is not important to me. As you said "if I want it for me, its OK."

My "job" here on earth is to control my perceptions.>

Before you knew about PCT, what did you think your "job" on earth was? You
do believe that you always controlled your perceptions anyway, don't you? Me
and my dog is doing his "job" on earth too just like you then, right?

Yes of course.

And for me " happiness in life" is the degree I succeed to control my>
perceptions.>

And, just how happy are you would you say? Do you have any goals you are not
controlling for at a very high degree of success? Can you share any goal
like that, if its not too personal a question?

I dont understand your question? Happiness is not a quantizising word. I for myself is either happy or unhappy. No, I am always happy. I choose perceptions that make me happy. This is what PCT and Bill have learned me.

I thought I was going to be unhappy two years ago when my dog became ill and died. But I prompt decided to feel happy for the time we had had together, and I felt happy that the dog should not suffer any more. And most of all I felt happy after controlling the event. I admit there were some hours that day the quality of my happiness was low.

Thet is all. So simple is life - for me.>

I am happy for you that your life is simple. Many people are stressed out
and in conflict much of their waking hours because life is not simple at all
for them. Each day is a hassle. Some want to lash out or kill themselves.
The need for psychologists/therapists seems to be growing here in the USA.
How about in your country?

Of course it is the same in Norway. But as in USA here are few people who have heard about Bill and his PCT. And that is the price for their hassled days. :-). We have a big mission.

Of course do people who knows PCT have conflicts and internal conflicts.

Was life more complex for you before having a PCT approach?

It is not good experiencing conflicts and internal conflicts without having an explanation. For me life was more complex before I learned about PCT.

Believe me. There is a degree of thruth in my comments.

I'll also tell you that I learned much about behavior reading the essay of Rosenblueth, Wiener and Bigelow "Behavior, purpose and teleology" in Philosophy of Science 1943. (Much more than I learned studying pedagogic when I was young of age.)
But I have definitely learned more about behavior from Bill's book and reading other writings about PCT and not least reading letters in this group.
Also reading your letters and the answers your letters have exposed.

Bjoern

I manage what I choose

E-mail bsimonse@c2i.net

[From Bjoern Simonsen (991016.22:30 EU-time)]

[From Rick Marken (991014.2210)]

I don't agree with your conclusion. These people are not
having problems because they don't believe that they have
to control their perceptions. They are having problems
because they are in _conflict_; they want to change and
they _don't_ want to change. If they just wanted to change
(get an other job, stop smoking, reduce their weight, etc.)
they would "just do it", whether they believed that they have
to control their perceptions or not.

What you call a "dilemma" is actually internal conflict; higher
level control systems in these people are trying to control
perceptions by setting lower level references that demand
changing jobs and staying in the same job, smoking and
not smoking, staying the same weight and losing weight, etc.
I know because I've been there.

I think your job, as a therapist, is to help these people
"go up a level" or two to see how they are creating these
conflicts for themselves. That is, I think this is a job
for the method of levels (MOL).

It is so obvious when you write it. Thank you Rick. I learned a lot from your answer.

Bjoern

E-mail bsimonse@c2i.net