# \[spam\] Re: A Question about Control **URL:** \ **Category:** CSG2006\ **Created:** [November 9, 2006, 2:19am UTC](http://discourse.iapct.org/t/spam-re-a-question-about-control/12813 "2006-11-09T02:19:58Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 2\ **Page:** 1

**Author:** ![bnhpct](http://discourse.iapct.org/user_avatar/discourse.iapct.org/bnhpct/32/34_2.png) [@bnhpct](http://discourse.iapct.org/u/bnhpct)\ **Post date:** [November 9, 2006, 2:19am UTC](http://discourse.iapct.org/t/spam-re-a-question-about-control/12813/1 "2006-11-09T02:19:58Z")

[From Bruce Nevin (2006.11.08.21:19 EST)] Fred Nickols (2006.11.08.0942 EST) -- What controls the reference condition? In the hierarchical arrangement, my understanding is that higher-levels supply reference signals to lower-levels and that, at the highest level, reference signals are intrinsic. In that scheme, everything is more or less built-in. But I can set goals, can't I? Aren't those reference signals? Or, are my goals simply articulations of lower-level reference signals that owe to some kind of discrepancy in some intrinsic reference signal? For example, did my goal of becoming a consultant reflect some built-in desire/goal/want/need/reference condition and if so, what might it have been? You're trying to find a connection between what you verbalize as your goals and the working of the perceptual control hierarchy. You know that we do not perceive our reference signals as such. So what are these things that we verbalize as our goals? One source of confusion at the levels at which you are talking about "goals" is that what we say our goals are is always subject to post-hoc rationalization. Another is that words make tidy patterns of their own and sometimes we think the map is the territory. David, Bryan, Dick, and others have investigated control of who we think we are. Projected through memory and imagination we perceive our present circumstances as the current moment within a progression or career of personal history and expectations. We often can "motivate" ourselves from these autobiographical reflections, but if my experience and observations are any guide at least as often our actual controlling is at variance from them and we are unperturbed at the discrepancies. Since for a true account of your reference perceptions at this level you cannot rely upon the stories that you tell yourself about who you are and what you want, the only sure way to infer your own reference perceptions is essentially in the same way that you deduce those of another: the Test to identify and verify controlled variables. It's not quite that what you have must be what you wanted, your circumstances are a product of what you are controlling plus the influences of disturbances that you don't care (enough) to resist or have not found means to resist. The disturbances that you do not resist can sometimes be more informative than those that you do. I don't know if this is helpful, but maybe it indicates some reasons why lower levels of the hierarchy are easier to investigate, and talk of "goals" in the management or motivational sense must proceed with great circumspection. /BN ---

**Author:** ![Fred\_Nickols1](http://discourse.iapct.org/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/f/ad7895/32.png) [@Fred\_Nickols1](http://discourse.iapct.org/u/Fred_Nickols1)\ **Post date:** [November 9, 2006, 10:34am UTC](http://discourse.iapct.org/t/spam-re-a-question-about-control/12813/2 "2006-11-09T10:34:26Z")

[From Fred Nickols (2006.11.09.0518 EST)] -- Thanks, Bruce. Your comments below are helpful. > **···** > > > From Bruce Nevin (2006.11.08.21:19 EST)] > > > > Fred Nickols (2006.11.08.0942 EST) -- > > > > What controls the reference condition? In the hierarchical > > arrangement, my understanding is that higher-levels supply > > reference signals to lower-levels and that, at the highest > > level, reference signals are intrinsic. In that scheme, > > everything is more or less built-in. But I can set goals, > > can't I? > > Aren't those reference signals? Or, are my goals simply > > articulations of lower-level reference signals that owe to > > some kind of discrepancy in some intrinsic reference signal? > > For example, did my goal of becoming a consultant reflect > > some built-in desire/goal/want/need/reference condition > > and if so, what might it have been? > > > > You're trying to find a connection between what you verbalize as your > > goals and the working of the perceptual control hierarchy. > > > > You know that we do not perceive our reference signals as such. So what > > are these things that we verbalize as our goals? > > > > One source of confusion at the levels at which you are talking about > > "goals" is that what we say our goals are is always subject to post-hoc > > rationalization. Another is that words make tidy patterns of their own > > and sometimes we think the map is the territory. > > > > David, Bryan, Dick, and others have investigated control of who we think > > we are. Projected through memory and imagination we perceive our present > > circumstances as the current moment within a progression or career of > > personal history and expectations. > > > > We often can "motivate" ourselves from these autobiographical > > reflections, but if my experience and observations are any guide at > > least as often our actual controlling is at variance from them and we > > are unperturbed at the discrepancies. > > > > Since for a true account of your reference perceptions at this level you > > cannot rely upon the stories that you tell yourself about who you are > > and what you want, the only sure way to infer your own reference > > perceptions is essentially in the same way that you deduce those of > > another: the Test to identify and verify controlled variables. It's not > > quite that what you have must be what you wanted, your circumstances are > > a product of what you are controlling plus the influences of > > disturbances that you don't care (enough) to resist or have not found > > means to resist. The disturbances that you do not resist can sometimes > > be more informative than those that you do. > > > > I don't know if this is helpful, but maybe it indicates some reasons why > > lower levels of the hierarchy are easier to investigate, and talk of > > "goals" in the management or motivational sense must proceed with great > > circumspection. > > > > /BN