[From Kenny Kitzke (2009.10.09)]
Rick and all: I am in western Kentucky at a state park for a Feast of the LORD for eight days. I am not too concerned this week with my normal world, including my business or PCT. I have discovered that there is no AT&T signal here, so my i-phone is not useable (call or answer) and it is the only phone I have other than the lodge phone (expensive and inconvenient).
I was surviving by communicating by email and SKYPE with family, friends and a few key clients around the world. Last night, there was a rain storm with threats of a tornado. Since then my wi-fi in my lodge is sporadic, going to zero long enough to get disconnected every couple of minutes and hoping a signal will reappear by clairvoyance. I have informed the state park lodge and they say “It happens quite often” as if that should settle the matter.
But, I will respond briefly to your request concerning the article on Taylorism (Scientific Management).
In a message dated 10/8/2009 1:33:02 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, rsmarken@GMAIL.COM writes:
···
[From Rick Marken (2009.10.08.1030)]
Dag Forssell (2009.10.07. 20.00)
Rick Marken (2009.10.07.1815)–
Bill Powers (2009.10.07.1005 MDT)–
The way I see meaning, it
is what your own brain attaches to incoming perceptions, and it consists
of other perceptions of your own, and nobody else’s, that have been
recorded and are played back when the received signal appears.I see it that way too (if I get your meaning;-))
Seems you finally have come around to recognize that there has to be memory
in perception.I think I understand what Bill said somewhat differently than you do.
I don’t think Bill was saying anything about whether or not there has
to be memory in perception. I think he was talking about just one
particular phenomenon: meaning. I think Bill was pointing to the fact
that meaning seems to involve the attachment (or association) of
remembered perceptions to other perceptions, such as the perception of
a word. So the meaning of a word perception like “apple” consists of
remembered perceptions, such as the remembered image, crunch and taste
of an apple, that are evoked by the perception of the word “apple”.It’s true that the “meaning” perception (p) that results when a word
evokes a remembered perception can be conceived of as a higher level
perception that is a function of the lower level perceptions – the
word apple (w) and the remembered image of an apple (i) say. It could
be modeled this way:i -----> | |
> f() |----> p
w -----> | |where f() is the perceptual function that combines the word (w) and
remembered image (i) perceptions into a perception of the meaning (p)
of the word “apple”. So this is a case where a high level perception,
of meaning (possibly a category type perception?), is a function of
both a “normal” lower level perception (of the word “apple”) and of a
remembered perception (the remembered image, i).What I questioned (and still question) is whether memory is
significantly involved in all perception. I’m certainly willing to
believe it is. I was (and still am) opposed, however, to just taking
your (and Bill’s) word for it that memory is always involved in all
perception because: 1) so far I have found it unnecessary to include
memory in the perceptual component of my control models; the models
typically fit the data almost perfectly so it’s not clear that the
addition of memory would improve things significantly, if at all. 2)
there is no research I know of that demonstrates the involvement of
memory in the perceptual side of control; it would be great if someone
did such research but I’m not going to be the one to do it since there
seems to be plenty to do in terms of research on the regular, plain
vanilla control model described in B:CP. 3) my own experience tells me
that memory is sometimes involved in “filling in” perceptions, and I
think it may sometimes affect my controlling; for example, perceiving
a room to look like it usually does (as remembered) so it’s hard to
control for finding the glasses that are sitting on the mantel, where
they never usually are; I’m just not sure how prevalent this is and,
even if it is going on all the time, how much it affects our ability
to control.So I’m not denying that memory is involved in perception, possibly
significantly. All I’m saying is that we don’t know much about it.
There is no research that I know of on this; if you know of some then
I’d like to see it. But I don’t believe things just because people say
they are true, even if they are people as brilliant as you and Bill.Best
Rick
PS. There is a very interesting article on “Scientific Management” in
the most recent New Yorker. Apparently it’s a review of a book that
is quite an indictment of “Scientific Management” and it’s current
incarnation as “Management Consulting”. The article is available on
the net at Not So Fast | The New Yorker.
I haven’t finished it yet but I’d be interested in hearing what you
(and Kenny and any other Management Consultants on this list) have to
say about it, if you get a chance to read it.–
Richard S. Marken PhD
rsmarken@gmail.com
www.mindreadings.com
