The meaning of the terms environment and behavior

Goldstein (2017, 09, 01:12:53)

Re.: Meaning of the words environment and behavior

I think that some of the conflicts on the CSGnet are related
to the meaning of these two words in PCT.

In the conceptual framework of PCT, there are many
environments and many behaviors.

The environment for a control system at one
level are all the perceptual signals at the next lower levels which it connects
to.

The behavior of a control system at one level is the output
signal that becomes the reference signal of all the control systems at the next
lower level which it connects to.

···

Good point David! And happy birthday!

···

On 1 Sep 2017, at 18:05, David Goldstein davidmg@verizon.net wrote:

Goldstein (2017, 09, 01:12:53)

Re.: Meaning of the words environment and behavior

I think that some of the conflicts on the CSGnet are related
to the meaning of these two words in PCT.

In the conceptual framework of PCT, there are many
environments and many behaviors.

The environment for a control system at one
level are all the perceptual signals at the next lower levels which it connects
to.

The behavior of a control system at one level is the output
signal that becomes the reference signal of all the control systems at the next
lower level which it connects to.

[From Bruce Nevin (2017.09.01.18:36)]

David Goldstein (2017, 09, 01:12:53) –

Yes, but can we say that the environment that our sensory organs sense is actually our environment only at the lowest level of intensity perceptions? The constructions that my nervous system makes of those intensity signals may not be true, but for the most part they are adequate. Not only that, but we have to talk to one another as though the perceptions that we project are in fact objects, relations, etc. that are actually there. We can’t get away from this fundamental conundrum, not in any practical sense.

We look at this, we have some intellectual awareness of it, but what use is that? It seems that we can’t do anything with it any more than we can do anything about it.

Nevertheless, your comment suggests another way to make it useful. Perhaps it would be helpful, David, if you could elaborate. PCT tells us that (except at the lowest level) the environment that is perceived at level n comprises only perceptual signals at level n-1. I assume you’re thinking of some specific conflicts that have arisen here. How is this stipulation of the theory the basis of those conflicts?

···

On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 1:05 PM, David Goldstein davidmg@verizon.net wrote:

Goldstein (2017, 09, 01:12:53)

Re.: Meaning of the words environment and behavior

I think that some of the conflicts on the CSGnet are related
to the meaning of these two words in PCT.

In the conceptual framework of PCT, there are many
environments and many behaviors.

The environment for a control system at one
level are all the perceptual signals at the next lower levels which it connects
to.

The behavior of a control system at one level is the output
signal that becomes the reference signal of all the control systems at the next
lower level which it connects to.

[From Rick Marken (2017.09.01.1945)]

···

Goldstein (2017, 09, 01:12:53)

DG: Re.: Meaning of the words environment and behavior

DG: I think that some of the conflicts on the CSGnet are related
to the meaning of these two words in PCT.

DG: In the conceptual framework of PCT, there are many
environments and many behaviors.

RM: I agree that there are many behaviors that we see but there is only one environment in PCT. It’s the physical world that is presumed to be on the other side of our sensory systems (internal and external). It’s the part of the PCT diagram of a control system called the “environment”. Another term for this environment is “physical reality”.Â

DG: The environment for a control system at one
level are all the perceptual signals at the next lower levels which it connects
to.

RM: In that case the word “environment” is being used metaphorically (Bill used it that way sometimes) to describe the fact that the perceptual functions of higher level systems are surrounded by perceptual inputs from lower level systems.

DG: The behavior of a control system at one level is the output
signal that becomes the reference signal of all the control systems at the next
lower level which it connects to.

RM: Yes, and these outputs are varied as the means of influencing the metaphorical environment of perceptual signals that are the basis of the higher level perceptual variables that are being controlled. But ultimately these outputs affect the perceptions controlled by the higher level systems through the non-metaphorical (physical) environment. This is because the perceptual variables at all levels of the control hierarchy – from intensities to system concepts – are a function of this physical environment. So when you are controlling any perceptual variable, whether it’s the loudness of a sound, the honesty of a communication or the degree to which you see yourself as a Dodger fan (how about those Dodgers;-), you are producing outputs that influence the state of that perceptual variable via environment (physical reality) of which that variable is a function.Â

RM: Perceptions that are not a function of the environment are called imaginations. You don’t really control imaginations since you just produce the imagination you want without having to deal with the exigencies (disturbances) of the real world. It’s a lot easier to control an imagined perception of, say, jumping top clear a 2 meter high bar that it is to produce that actual perception.Â

BestÂ

Rick


Richard S. MarkenÂ

"Perfection is achieved not when you have nothing more to add, but when you
have nothing left to take away.�
                --Antoine de Saint-Exupery

Hi Dag, Rick

As I wrote many times before. Rick is double »personality«. He can write in RCT and PCT language very clear. So I don’t understand Rick why don’t you stay all the time PCT personality. I knew from the first time we had spoken that you can be really good PCT thinker if you want to. . Why don’t you persist with PCT terminology ?

RM: Yes, and these outputs are varied as the means of influencing the metaphorical environment of perceptual signals that are the basis of the higher level perceptual variables that are being controlled. But ultimately these outputs affect the perceptions controlled by the higher level systems through the non-metaphorical (physical) environment. This is because the perceptual variables at all levels of the control hierarchy – from intensities to system concepts – are a function of this physical environment. So when you are controlling any perceptual variable, whether it’s the loudness of a sound, the honesty of a communication or the degree to which you see yourself as a Dodger fan (how about those Dodgers;-), you are producing outputs that influence the state of that perceptual variable via environment (physical reality) of which that variable is a function.

HB : Perfect… This is for publishing…… .:slight_smile:

Maybe we can define environment (physical reality) to be more clear what it is about :

Bill P (B:CP) :

image001130.png

image00298.png

Best,

Boris

···

From: Richard Marken [mailto:rsmarken@gmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, September 02, 2017 4:44 AM
To: csgnet@lists.illinois.edu
Subject: Re: The meaning of the terms environment and behavior

[From Rick Marken (2017.09.01.1945)]

Goldstein (2017, 09, 01:12:53)

DG: Re.: Meaning of the words environment and behavior

DG: I think that some of the conflicts on the CSGnet are related to the meaning of these two words in PCT.

DG: In the conceptual framework of PCT, there are many environments and many behaviors.

RM: I agree that there are many behaviors that we see but there is only one environment in PCT. It’s the physical world that is presumed to be on the other side of our sensory systems (internal and external). It’s the part of the PCT diagram of a control system called the “environment”. Another term for this environment is “physical reality”.

DG: The environment for a control system at one level are all the perceptual signals at the next lower levels which it connects to.

RM: In that case the word “environment” is being used metaphorically (Bill used it that way sometimes) to describe the fact that the perceptual functions of higher level systems are surrounded by perceptual inputs from lower level systems.

DG: The behavior of a control system at one level is the output signal that becomes the reference signal of all the control systems at the next lower level which it connects to.

RM: Yes, and these outputs are varied as the means of influencing the metaphorical environment of perceptual signals that are the basis of the higher level perceptual variables that are being controlled. But ultimately these outputs affect the perceptions controlled by the higher level systems through the non-metaphorical (physical) environment. This is because the perceptual variables at all levels of the control hierarchy – from intensities to system concepts – are a function of this physical environment. So when you are controlling any perceptual variable, whether it’s the loudness of a sound, the honesty of a communication or the degree to which you see yourself as a Dodger fan (how about those Dodgers;-), you are producing outputs that influence the state of that perceptual variable via environment (physical reality) of which that variable is a function.

RM: Perceptions that are not a function of the environment are called imaginations. You don’t really control imaginations since you just produce the imagination you want without having to deal with the exigencies (disturbances) of the real world. It’s a lot easier to control an imagined perception of, say, jumping top clear a 2 meter high bar that it is to produce that actual perception.

Best

Rick

Richard S. Marken

"Perfection is achieved not when you have nothing more to add, but when you
have nothing left to take away.�
–Antoine de Saint-Exupery

[Martin Taylor 2017.09.02.07.14]

[From Rick Marken (2017.09.01.1945)]

I find it useful to distinguish the "environment" of a control unit

(everything through which the influence of the control unit’s output
might reach its perceptual input function) from the “external
environment” of the organism (everything that might affect its
sensors or be influenced by its effectors).

In everyday speech, the "environment" of something is, generally

speaking, everything in a part of space (or space-time) that
contains the thing and might influence or be influenced by it, but
is not part of the thing. I don’t think there’s any need for a
specialized PCT meaning for the word. The specialized part is the
definition of the “thing” in question, whether it be a neural
control hierarchy whose environment would include the chemical bath
inside the body, the organism as a whole, or just a control unit
that consists of perceptual function, reference function,
comparator, and output function.

Martin
···

Goldstein (2017, 09, 01:12:53)

                DG: Re.: Meaning of the words

environment and behavior

                DG: I think that some of the

conflicts on the CSGnet are related
to the meaning of these two words in PCT.

                DG: In the conceptual framework of

PCT, there are many
environments and many behaviors.

          RM: I agree that there are many behaviors that we see

but there is only one environment in PCT. It’s the
physical world that is presumed to be on the other side of
our sensory systems (internal and external). It’s the part
of the PCT diagram of a control system called the
“environment”. Another term for this environment is
“physical reality”.

David Goldstein (2017. 09.02. 1956)
Re.: Rick Marken (2017.09.01.1945)]

What is the physical environment variable for a perception of a person’s self-image?

In Q Methodology studies which I have done, the “metaphysical environment” were the principle level perceptions which a person has of himself/herself.

For example see: http://www.dmghelpcenter.com/Selected_Publications_A/Self-image%20study.pdf

The self-image perception was thought of as being at a system level of perception.

David

···

-----Original Message-----

From: Richard Marken rsmarken@gmail.com

To: csgnet csgnet@lists.illinois.edu

Sent: Fri, Sep 1, 2017 10:45 pm

Subject: Re: The meaning of the terms environment and behavior

[From Rick Marken (2017.09.01.1945)]

Goldstein (2017, 09, 01:12:53)

DG: Re.: Meaning of the words environment and behavior

DG: I think that some of the conflicts on the CSGnet are related
to the meaning of these two words in PCT.

DG: In the conceptual framework of PCT, there are many
environments and many behaviors.

RM: I agree that there are many behaviors that we see but there is only one environment in PCT. It’s the physical world that is presumed to be on the other side of our sensory systems (internal and external). It’s the part of the PCT diagram of a control system called the “environment”. Another term for this environment is “physical reality”.

DG: The environment for a control system at one
level are all the perceptual signals at the next lower levels which it connects
to.

RM: In that case the word “environment” is being used metaphorically (Bill used it that way sometimes) to describe the fact that the perceptual functions of higher level systems are surrounded by perceptual inputs from lower level systems.

DG: The behavior of a control system at one level is the output
signal that becomes the reference signal of all the control systems at the next
lower level which it connects to.

RM: Yes, and these outputs are varied as the means of influencing the metaphorical environment of perceptual signals that are the basis of the higher level perceptual variables that are being controlled. But ultimately these outputs affect the perceptions controlled by the higher level systems through the non-metaphorical (physical) environment. This is because the perceptual variables at all levels of the control hierarchy – from intensities to system concepts – are a function of this physical environment. So when you are controlling any perceptual variable, whether it’s the loudness of a sound, the honesty of a communication or the degree to which you see yourself as a Dodger fan (how about those Dodgers;-), you are producing outputs that influence the state of that perceptual variable via environment (physical reality) of which that variable is a function.

RM: Perceptions that are not a function of the environment are called imaginations. You don’t really control imaginations since you just produce the imagination you want without having to deal with the exigencies (disturbances) of the real world. It’s a lot easier to control an imagined perception of, say, jumping top clear a 2 meter high bar that it is to produce that actual perception.

Best

Rick


Richard S. Marken

"Perfection is achieved not when you have nothing more to add, but when you
have nothing left to take away.�
–Antoine de Saint-Exupery

[From Bruce Nevin (217.09.03.13:44)]

David Goldstein (2017. 09.02. 1956) –

David,

To locate some answers to that question, “what are the physical environment variables for a perceptions for a perception of a person’s self-image”, begin with a review of the physical means by which you experimentally disturbed subjects’ control of such a variable.

Remember, Rick has not claimed that there is one physical variable in the environment corresponding to a perceptual signal in the hierarchy (except at the Intensity level, I presume), but rather that a perception is a function of a number of variables, ‘aspects’ of the perceived environment.

···

On Sat, Sep 2, 2017 at 8:04 PM, David Goldstein davidmg@verizon.net wrote:

David Goldstein (2017. 09.02. 1956)
Re.: Â Rick Marken (2017.09.01.1945)]

What is the physical environment variable for a perception of a person’s self-image?

In Q Methodology studies which I have done, the “metaphysical environment” were the principle level perceptions which a person has of himself/herself.

For example see:Â http://www.dmghelpcenter.com/Selected_Publications_A/Self-image%20study.pdf

The self-image perception was thought of as being at a system level of perception.Â

David

-----Original Message-----

From: Richard Marken rsmarken@gmail.com

To: csgnet csgnet@lists.illinois.edu

Sent: Fri, Sep 1, 2017 10:45 pm

Subject: Re: The meaning of the terms environment and behavior

[From Rick Marken (2017.09.01.1945)]

Goldstein (2017, 09, 01:12:53)

DG: Re.: Meaning of the words environment and behavior

DG: I think that some of the conflicts on the CSGnet are related
to the meaning of these two words in PCT.

DG: In the conceptual framework of PCT, there are many
environments and many behaviors.

RM: I agree that there are many behaviors that we see but there is only one environment in PCT. It’s the physical world that is presumed to be on the other side of our sensory systems (internal and external). It’s the part of the PCT diagram of a control system called the “environment”. Another term for this environment is “physical reality”.Â

DG: The environment for a control system at one
level are all the perceptual signals at the next lower levels which it connects
to.

RM: In that case the word “environment” is being used metaphorically (Bill used it that way sometimes) to describe the fact that the perceptual functions of higher level systems are surrounded by perceptual inputs from lower level systems.

DG: The behavior of a control system at one level is the output
signal that becomes the reference signal of all the control systems at the next
lower level which it connects to.

RM: Yes, and these outputs are varied as the means of influencing the metaphorical environment of perceptual signals that are the basis of the higher level perceptual variables that are being controlled. But ultimately these outputs affect the perceptions controlled by the higher level systems through the non-metaphorical (physical) environment. This is because the perceptual variables at all levels of the control hierarchy – from intensities to system concepts – are a function of this physical environment. So when you are controlling any perceptual variable, whether it’s the loudness of a sound, the honesty of a communication or the degree to which you see yourself as a Dodger fan (how about those Dodgers;-), you are producing outputs that influence the state of that perceptual variable via environment (physical reality) of which that variable is a function.Â

RM: Perceptions that are not a function of the environment are called imaginations. You don’t really control imaginations since you just produce the imagination you want without having to deal with the exigencies (disturbances) of the real world. It’s a lot easier to control an imagined perception of, say, jumping top clear a 2 meter high bar that it is to produce that actual perception.Â

BestÂ

Rick


Richard S. MarkenÂ

"Perfection is achieved not when you have nothing more to add, but when you
have nothing left to take away.�
                --Antoine de Saint-Exupery

[From Rick Marken (2017.09.03.1840)]

···

David Goldstein (2017. 09.02. 1956)

DG: What is the physical environment variable for a perception of a person’s self-image?

RM: Excellent question. First, you have to remember that perceptions are functions of environmental variables. Like the “taste of lemonade”, there is not necessarily any variable in the environment that corresponds to an experienced perceptual variable. Environmental variables, however, are the basis of all perceptions. The perceptual functions in your nervous system transform the sensory effects of environmental variables into perceptual variables.
Â

RM: In PCT there is presumed to be a hierarchy of these perceptual functions in the nervous system (and there is considerable evidence that this is the case). The perceptual functions at the lowest level of this hierarchy produce perceptions that seem to be “out there” in the environment. These are perceptions – like the perception of objects, movements and distances – that you probably think of as having an environmental variable as a correlate. But there are also higher level perceptions – like the perception of principles and concepts – that seem to be “in here” – “inside ourselves”, as Powers says in the first sentence of the chapter in B:CP on “Higher Levels”. What you call a perception of “self -image” is one of these higher level perceptual variables. But like the perception of objects, movement and distances, these higher level perceptions are ultimately a function of the sensory effects of environmental variables.Â

DG: For example see:Â http://www.dmghelpcenter.com/Selected_Publications_A/Self-image%20study.pdf

DG: The self-image perception was thought of as being at a system level of perception.Â

RM: Thanks for this, David. Here are the first five self-description statements that you used to determine the nature of the perceptual variable that you call self-image:

  1. I want to love and be lovedÂ
  2. I am anxious, insecureÂ
  3. I am resistant to change, uncomfortable with new relationships,
    procedures, or thingsÂ
  4. I tolerate imperfections in other people in my environment, and even
    in myselfÂ
  5. I have inner strengthÂ

RM: All of these statements describe perceptions that are ultimately based on lower level perceptions. “Love” is the perception of a kind of relationship between people. “Anxiety” is a perception of a type of bodily (internal environment) state. “Insecurity” is also a perception of a relationship between oneself and other people and, possibly, other things. “Resistance to change” is a perception of a principle derived from perceptions of how you deal with relationships between yourself and people, procedures and things. “Tolerance” is also a perception of a principle derived from perceptions of how you deal with relationships primarily between yourself and other people. “Inner strength” also seems like the perception of a principle derived from perceptions of how you deal with relationships between yourself and people and things.Â

RM: So “self-image” is a perception based on perceptions (Love, Anxiety, Insecurity, etc.) which are themselves based on environmental variables. If you have difficulty thinking of Love, Anxiety, Insecurity, etc. as perceptions based on environmental variables then ask people “how” they perceive these things. How, for example, does one know that people are in love? You’ll probably hear about things like hugging, kissing, blushing, etc., which are more like the kind of perceptions that you can think of as being based on environmental variables. Â

RM: The PCT slogan that “it’s all perception” does not mean that it’s all make believe or imagined or whatever. It means that everything we experience – indeed, everything we can talk about – is perception and, thus, ultimately a function of the sensory effects of environmental stimulation. The perceptual functions of the nervous system are producing all that we experience as “reality”, from the color our skin to the system concepts that account for the fact that some people value (control for) brotherhood and love while others  value separateness and exploitation.

BestÂ

Rick


Richard S. MarkenÂ

"Perfection is achieved not when you have nothing more to add, but when you
have nothing left to take away.�
                --Antoine de Saint-Exupery

[From David Goldstein (2017.09.04.1755)]

Rick Marken (2017.09.03.1840)
Bruce Nevin

The self-statements were generated by the client. The instruction was for the client to come up with statements that were generally true or false of the client.

The client was asked to sort the same set of statements when imagining different circumstances (conditions of instruction). The situations were imagined ones. In PCT terms, perhaps they provided “the disturbance.”

The analysis grouped the statements into subsets which described different aspects of the client. There was more than one self-image present. The analysis revealed some internal conflicts within each self-image.

Language and memory are playing a large role in these results.

I don’t see how emphasizing the role of the physical environment gets us very far. Do you?

David

···

-----Original Message-----

From: Richard Marken rsmarken@gmail.com

To: csgnet csgnet@lists.illinois.edu

Sent: Sun, Sep 3, 2017 9:37 pm

Subject: Re: The meaning of the terms environment and behavior

[From Rick Marken (2017.09.03.1840)]

DG: What is the physical environment variable for a perception of a person’s self-image?

David Goldstein (2017. 09.02. 1956)
RM: Excellent question. First, you have to remember that perceptions are functions of environmental variables. Like the “taste of lemonade”, there is not necessarily any variable in the environment that corresponds to an experienced perceptual variable. Environmental variables, however, are the basis of all perceptions. The perceptual functions in your nervous system transform the sensory effects of environmental variables into perceptual variables.

RM: In PCT there is presumed to be a hierarchy of these perceptual functions in the nervous system (and there is considerable evidence that this is the case). The perceptual functions at the lowest level of this hierarchy produce perceptions that seem to be “out there” in the environment. These are perceptions – like the perception of objects, movements and distances – that you probably think of as having an environmental variable as a correlate. But there are also higher level perceptions – like the perception of principles and concepts – that seem to be “in here” – “inside ourselves”, as Powers says in the first sentence of the chapter in B:CP on “Higher Levels”. What you call a perception of “self -image” is one of these higher level perceptual variables. But like the perception of objects, movement and distances, these higher level perceptions are ultimately a function of the sensory effects of environmental variables.

DG: For example see: http://www.dmghelpcenter.com/Selected_Publications_A/Self-image%20study.pdf

DG: The self-image perception was thought of as being at a system level of perception.

RM: Thanks for this, David. Here are the first five self-description statements that you used to determine the nature of the perceptual variable that you call self-image:

  1. I want to love and be loved

  2. I am anxious, insecure

  3. I am resistant to change, uncomfortable with new relationships,

procedures, or things

  1. I tolerate imperfections in other people in my environment, and even

in myself

  1. I have inner strength

RM: All of these statements describe perceptions that are ultimately based on lower level perceptions. “Love” is the perception of a kind of relationship between people. “Anxiety” is a perception of a type of bodily (internal environment) state. “Insecurity” is also a perception of a relationship between oneself and other people and, possibly, other things. “Resistance to change” is a perception of a principle derived from perceptions of how you deal with relationships between yourself and people, procedures and things. “Tolerance” is also a perception of a principle derived from perceptions of how you deal with relationships primarily between yourself and other people. “Inner strength” also seems like the perception of a principle derived from perceptions of how you deal with relationships between yourself and people and things.

RM: So “self-image” is a perception based on perceptions (Love, Anxiety, Insecurity, etc.) which are themselves based on environmental variables. If you have difficulty thinking of Love, Anxiety, Insecurity, etc. as perceptions based on environmental variables then ask people “how” they perceive these things. How, for example, does one know that people are in love? You’ll probably hear about things like hugging, kissing, blushing, etc., which are more like the kind of perceptions that you can think of as being based on environmental variables.

RM: The PCT slogan that “it’s all perception” does not mean that it’s all make believe or imagined or whatever. It means that everything we experience – indeed, everything we can talk about – is perception and, thus, ultimately a function of the sensory effects of environmental stimulation. The perceptual functions of the nervous system are producing all that we experience as “reality”, from the color our skin to the system concepts that account for the fact that some people value (control for) brotherhood and love while others value separateness and exploitation.

Best

Rick


Richard S. Marken

"Perfection is achieved not when you have nothing more to add, but when you
have nothing left to take away.�
–Antoine de Saint-Exupery

[From Bruce Nevin (2017.09.04.1444) ET]

David Goldstein (2017.09.04.1755) –

The client was asked to sort the same set of statements when imagining  different circumstances (conditions of instruction). The situations were imagined ones. In PCT terms, perhaps they provided  “the disturbance.” […]  I don’t see how emphasizing the role of the physical environment gets us very far. Do you?

What were the different circumstances that they imagined themselves to be in? Were there no physical consequences of being in one circumstance that differed from physical consequences of being in another?Â

Bear in mind that states and conditions within the body are sensed, and are in the physical environment of the nervous system. As I understand it, prominent among those states and conditions are those that we identify as ‘feelings’; and a cognitive identification of a cluster of feelings (sometimes but not necessarily with language) is what we identify as an emotion.

Â

···

On Mon, Sep 4, 2017 at 1:22 PM, David Goldstein davidmg@verizon.net wrote:

[From David Goldstein (2017.09.04.1755)]

Rick Marken (2017.09.03.1840)
Bruce Nevin

The self-statements were generated by the client. The instruction was for the client to come up with statements that were generally true or false of the client.Â

The client was asked to sort the same set of statements when imagining  different circumstances (conditions of instruction). The situations were imagined ones. In PCT terms, perhaps they provided  "the disturbance."Â

The analysis grouped the statements into subsets which described different aspects of the client. There was more than one self-image present. The analysis revealed some internal conflicts within each self-image.Â

Language and memory are playing a large role in these results.Â

I don’t see how emphasizing the role of the physical environment gets us very far. Do you?

David

-----Original Message-----

From: Richard Marken rsmarken@gmail.com

To: csgnet csgnet@lists.illinois.edu

Sent: Sun, Sep 3, 2017 9:37 pm

Subject: Re: The meaning of the terms environment and behavior

[From Rick Marken (2017.09.03.1840)]

DG: What is the physical environment variable for a perception of a person’s self-image?

David Goldstein (2017. 09.02. 1956)
RM: Excellent question. First, you have to remember that perceptions are functions of environmental variables. Like the “taste of lemonade”, there is not necessarily any variable in the environment that corresponds to an experienced perceptual variable. Environmental variables, however, are the basis of all perceptions. The perceptual functions in your nervous system transform the sensory effects of environmental variables into perceptual variables.
Â

RM: In PCT there is presumed to be a hierarchy of these perceptual functions in the nervous system (and there is considerable evidence that this is the case). The perceptual functions at the lowest level of this hierarchy produce perceptions that seem to be “out there” in the environment. These are perceptions – like the perception of objects, movements and distances – that you probably think of as having an environmental variable as a correlate. But there are also higher level perceptions – like the perception of principles and concepts – that seem to be “in here” – “inside ourselves”, as Powers says in the first sentence of the chapter in B:CP on “Higher Levels”. What you call a perception of “self -image” is one of these higher level perceptual variables. But like the perception of objects, movement and distances, these higher level perceptions are ultimately a function of the sensory effects of environmental variables.Â

DG: For example see:Â http://www.dmghelpcenter.com/Selected_Publications_A/Self-image%20study.pdf

DG: The self-image perception was thought of as being at a system level of perception.Â

RM: Thanks for this, David. Here are the first five self-description statements that you used to determine the nature of the perceptual variable that you call self-image:

  1. I want to love and be lovedÂ

  2. I am anxious, insecureÂ

  3. I am resistant to change, uncomfortable with new relationships,

procedures, or thingsÂ

  1. I tolerate imperfections in other people in my environment, and even

in myselfÂ

  1. I have inner strengthÂ

RM: All of these statements describe perceptions that are ultimately based on lower level perceptions. “Love” is the perception of a kind of relationship between people. “Anxiety” is a perception of a type of bodily (internal environment) state. “Insecurity” is also a perception of a relationship between oneself and other people and, possibly, other things. “Resistance to change” is a perception of a principle derived from perceptions of how you deal with relationships between yourself and people, procedures and things. “Tolerance” is also a perception of a principle derived from perceptions of how you deal with relationships primarily between yourself and other people. “Inner strength” also seems like the perception of a principle derived from perceptions of how you deal with relationships between yourself and people and things.Â

RM: So “self-image” is a perception based on perceptions (Love, Anxiety, Insecurity, etc.) which are themselves based on environmental variables. If you have difficulty thinking of Love, Anxiety, Insecurity, etc. as perceptions based on environmental variables then ask people “how” they perceive these things. How, for example, does one know that people are in love? You’ll probably hear about things like hugging, kissing, blushing, etc., which are more like the kind of perceptions that you can think of as being based on environmental variables. Â

RM: The PCT slogan that “it’s all perception” does not mean that it’s all make believe or imagined or whatever. It means that everything we experience – indeed, everything we can talk about – is perception and, thus, ultimately a function of the sensory effects of environmental stimulation. The perceptual functions of the nervous system are producing all that we experience as “reality”, from the color our skin to the system concepts that account for the fact that some people value (control for) brotherhood and love while others  value separateness and exploitation.

BestÂ

Rick


Richard S. MarkenÂ

"Perfection is achieved not when you have nothing more to add, but when you
have nothing left to take away.�
                --Antoine de Saint-Exupery

David Goldstein (2017.09.04:14:54)

Bruce Nevin (2017.09.04.1444)

Bruce,

The conditions of instruction listed in the PDF article contain the different situations.

David

···

On Mon, Sep 4, 2017 at 1:22 PM, David Goldstein davidmg@verizon.net wrote:

[From David Goldstein (2017.09.04.1755)]

Rick Marken (2017.09.03.1840)
Bruce Nevin

The self-statements were generated by the client. The instruction was for the client to come up with statements that were generally true or false of the client.

The client was asked to sort the same set of statements when imagining different circumstances (conditions of instruction). The situations were imagined ones. In PCT terms, perhaps they provided “the disturbance.”

The analysis grouped the statements into subsets which described different aspects of the client. There was more than one self-image present. The analysis revealed some internal conflicts within each self-image.

Language and memory are playing a large role in these results.

I don’t see how emphasizing the role of the physical environment gets us very far. Do you?

David

-----Original Message-----

From: Richard Marken rsmarken@gmail.com

To: csgnet csgnet@lists.illinois.edu

Sent: Sun, Sep 3, 2017 9:37 pm

Subject: Re: The meaning of the terms environment and behavior

[From Rick Marken (2017.09.03.1840)]

DG: What is the physical environment variable for a perception of a person’s self-image?

David Goldstein (2017. 09.02. 1956)
RM: Excellent question. First, you have to remember that perceptions are functions of environmental variables. Like the “taste of lemonade”, there is not necessarily any variable in the environment that corresponds to an experienced perceptual variable. Environmental variables, however, are the basis of all perceptions. The perceptual functions in your nervous system transform the sensory effects of environmental variables into perceptual variables.

RM: In PCT there is presumed to be a hierarchy of these perceptual functions in the nervous system (and there is considerable evidence that this is the case). The perceptual functions at the lowest level of this hierarchy produce perceptions that seem to be “out there” in the environment. These are perceptions – like the perception of objects, movements and distances – that you probably think of as having an environmental variable as a correlate. But there are also higher level perceptions – like the perception of principles and concepts – that seem to be “in here” – “inside ourselves”, as Powers says in the first sentence of the chapter in B:CP on “Higher Levels”. What you call a perception of “self -image” is one of these higher level perceptual variables. But like the perception of objects, movement and distances, these higher level perceptions are ultimately a function of the sensory effects of environmental variables.

DG: For example see: http://www.dmghelpcenter.com/Selected_Publications_A/Self-image%20study.pdf

DG: The self-image perception was thought of as being at a system level of perception.

RM: Thanks for this, David. Here are the first five self-description statements that you used to determine the nature of the perceptual variable that you call self-image:

  1. I want to love and be loved

  2. I am anxious, insecure

  3. I am resistant to change, uncomfortable with new relationships,

procedures, or things

  1. I tolerate imperfections in other people in my environment, and even

in myself

  1. I have inner strength

RM: All of these statements describe perceptions that are ultimately based on lower level perceptions. “Love” is the perception of a kind of relationship between people. “Anxiety” is a perception of a type of bodily (internal environment) state. “Insecurity” is also a perception of a relationship between oneself and other people and, possibly, other things. “Resistance to change” is a perception of a principle derived from perceptions of how you deal with relationships between yourself and people, procedures and things. “Tolerance” is also a perception of a principle derived from perceptions of how you deal with relationships primarily between yourself and other people. “Inner strength” also seems like the perception of a principle derived from perceptions of how you deal with relationships between yourself and people and things.

RM: So “self-image” is a perception based on perceptions (Love, Anxiety, Insecurity, etc.) which are themselves based on environmental variables. If you have difficulty thinking of Love, Anxiety, Insecurity, etc. as perceptions based on environmental variables then ask people “how” they perceive these things. How, for example, does one know that people are in love? You’ll probably hear about things like hugging, kissing, blushing, etc., which are more like the kind of perceptions that you can think of as being based on environmental variables.

RM: The PCT slogan that “it’s all perception” does not mean that it’s all make believe or imagined or whatever. It means that everything we experience – indeed, everything we can talk about – is perception and, thus, ultimately a function of the sensory effects of environmental stimulation. The perceptual functions of the nervous system are producing all that we experience as “reality”, from the color our skin to the system concepts that account for the fact that some people value (control for) brotherhood and love while others value separateness and exploitation.

Best

Rick


Richard S. Marken

"Perfection is achieved not when you have nothing more to add, but when you
have nothing left to take away.�
–Antoine de Saint-Exupery

[From Rick Marken (2017.09.04.1835)]

···

David Goldstein (2017.09.04.1755)–

Rick Marken (2017.09.03.1840)
Bruce Nevin

DG: The self-statements were generated by the client. The instruction was for the client to come up with statements that were generally true or false of the client…

DG: Language and memory are playing a large role in these results.Â

DG: I don’t see how emphasizing the role of the physical environment gets us very far. Do you?

RM: It depends on where you want to get.Â

RM: You had asked what was the physical environmental basis of the perception of self- image and I described what I thought it might be in terms of the lower level perceptual variables that, based on your study, are presumed to be the basis of the perception of this variable. Language is actually part of that physical basis; the sounds, structure and semantics of language are all perceptual variables that are based on physical (graphic or acoustic) environmental variables.

RM: Â But I don’t think knowing the physical basis of the lower level perceptions that are the basis of the perception of “self image” necessarily gets us very far (though it can’t hurt to know something about it). All that knowing the physical environmental basis of higher level perceptions gets us is a correct understanding of the model of how these perceptions are controlled.Â

RM: You would really only need to know the physical basis of complex perceptions like self-image if you wanted to build a robot that controls such perceptions. But we certainly don’t need to know the physical basis of self-image to do the kind of research you describe, which I see as being aimed at getting a picture of what perception people are controlling when they control a variable that could be called “self-image”.Â

BestÂ

Rick

Â


Richard S. MarkenÂ

"Perfection is achieved not when you have nothing more to add, but when you
have nothing left to take away.�
                --Antoine de Saint-Exupery