The Target Model and PCT

[From Fred Nickols (2011.03.21.1447)]

Thanks for the reminder about CSGNet. I've been meaning to let folks know
that I just had an article published in the Performance Improvement Journal
titled "Manage Your Own Performance: No One Else Can." It features my
Target Model which, of course, is based on PCT and it gives Bill and PCT
credit. A copy is attached in case anyone cares to read it.

Regards,

Fred Nickols
fred@nickols.us

ManageYOP.pdf (973 KB)

···

-----Original Message-----
From: Control Systems Group Network (CSGnet)
[mailto:CSGNET@LISTSERV.ILLINOIS.EDU] On Behalf Of Richard Marken
Sent: Monday, March 21, 2011 1:46 PM
To: CSGNET@LISTSERV.ILLINOIS.EDU
Subject: Happy Birthday Bach

[From Rick Marken (2011.03.21.1345)]

Pretty quiet on CSGNet.

But it is Bach's birthday so I think that's worth paying our respects
to one of the finest controllers who ever lived.

Oh, and happy vernal equinox, too!

Best

Rick
--
Richard S. Marken PhD
rsmarken@gmail.com
www.mindreadings.com

[From Bill Powers (2011.03.25.0938 Mdt)]

Fred Nickols (2011.03.21.1447) --

FN: Thanks for the reminder about CSGNet. I've been meaning to let folks know that I just had an article published in the Performance Improvement Journal titled "Manage Your Own Performance: No One Else Can." It features my Target Model which, of course, is based on PCT and it gives Bill and PCT
credit. A copy is attached in case anyone cares to read it.

BP: Not only is this paper a beautiful application of PCT, but it's beautifully organized and written. And beyond that, it introduces the concepts of proximal and ultimate goals, an ordering not by level but by time that involves mental models of the world, which may lead to a new level in the hierarchy or at least a new understanding of existing levels.

My late co-founder of PCT, Bob Clark, tried to introduce a level involving something like what you are proposing. He referred to it as "temporal control," but never was able to find a useful way to define or model it. You have made this dimension of control much clearer, and I think that if you focus on this for a while with the target of fitting your idea into the hierarchy as it now exists, you can improve what we have or add something to it. Just keep thinking "how" and "why". What abilities must already exist to control for ultimate results, and where in the hierarchy does perception of the ultimate result fit?

I'd like permission to copy this paper to the people I met at a meeting, Monday and Tuesday, at the University of Nevada.

Best,

Bill P.

[From Fred Nickols (2011.03.25.0936 PDT)]

Bill Powers (2011.03.25.0938 Mdt)]

Fred Nickols (2011.03.21.1447) --

BP: Not only is this paper a beautiful application of PCT, but it's
beautifully organized and written. And beyond that, it introduces the
concepts of proximal and ultimate goals, an ordering not by level but
by time that involves mental models of the world, which may lead to a
new level in the hierarchy or at least a new understanding of existing
levels.

FN: Wow! I'm terribly flattered. I never expected such a response. You
are certainly free to pass along the paper to the people you met at the
University of Nevada.

As it happens, John Kirkland had asked me about "anticipation" in relation
to the frequently used driving examples and I will try to post something
relevant to that inquiry here.

In crude form, I think we do anticipate; for instance, I think we predict
disturbances. In getting to work, I have a route in mind, a path I intend
following. That is a reference signal for route traveled. As I move along,
my perceptions inform me that I am on track or off as the case may be. Up
ahead I see some road construction and barriers that will force me to take
an exit I did not originally intend taking. I am knowledgeable of the roads
and streets in the area and I quickly revise my intended route. Depending
on the extent of the required revision, I might also have to revise my
intended arrival time. Therein is a big difference to my way of thinking -
the difference between route and arrival time.

To my way of thinking, route and arrival time are both variables and both
are potential targets for control. Arrival time, however, is simply a point
in time and it can be expressed in numeric form as hour/minute. Route,
however, in my mind or to my way of thinking, is at least a two-dimensional
matter (e.g., in the form of a map showing streets, turns, etc). My
perceptions allow me to figure out where I am in that route and, in
conjunction with my perception of the time and the progress I'm making,
allow me to gauge whether I am on track or off track with respect to route
and arrival time. As you said, Bill, it's a mental model. I'm not sure
where that kind of thing shows up in the HPCT hierarchy. I told John
Kirkland I thought maybe at the level of program (for setting and following
the route).

Anyway, thanks for the compliment and I'll certainly ponder this some more.

Regards,

Fred Nickols
Managing Partner
Distance Consulting LLC
1558 Coshcoton Avenue - Suite 303
Mount Vernon, OH 43050-5416
www.nickols.us | fred@nickols.us

"Assistance at a Distance"

···

-----Original Message-----
From: Control Systems Group Network (CSGnet)
[mailto:CSGNET@LISTSERV.ILLINOIS.EDU] On Behalf Of Bill Powers
Sent: Friday, March 25, 2011 8:56 AM
To: CSGNET@LISTSERV.ILLINOIS.EDU
Subject: Re: The Target Model and PCT

My late co-founder of PCT, Bob Clark, tried to introduce a level
involving something like what you are proposing. He referred to it as
"temporal control," but never was able to find a useful way to define
or model it. You have made this dimension of control much clearer,
and I think that if you focus on this for a while with the target of
fitting your idea into the hierarchy as it now exists, you can
improve what we have or add something to it. Just keep thinking "how"
and "why". What abilities must already exist to control for ultimate
results, and where in the hierarchy does perception of the ultimate result
fit?

I'd like permission to copy this paper to the people I met at a
meeting, Monday and Tuesday, at the University of Nevada.

Best,

Bill P.

(Gavin Ritz 2011.03.26.15.21NZT)

[From Fred Nickols
(2011.03.25.0936 PDT)]

Bill Powers
(2011.03.25.0938 Mdt)]

Fred Nickols
(2011.03.21.1447)

I really like these positive and buoyant responses on
the PCT list. They make us want to participate and add value.

There is such a rich amount of stuff in PCT.

I have just come off the Skype with my sister she
lives in Playa del Rey (Calif), explaining to her about the horrendous behaviour of an old friend
of hers.

At the end of the dialogue she totally understood her friend’s
behaviour all in PCT. She got it first time up.

I started by saying to her, your friend isn’t behaving
she’s trying to control her reality.

Great stuff Fred. I’m working hard on this too.

Kind regards

Gavin

···

BP: Not only is this paper a beautiful application of
PCT, but it’s

beautifully organized and written. And beyond that, it
introduces the

concepts of proximal and ultimate goals, an ordering
not by level but

by time that involves mental models of the world,
which may lead to a

new level in the hierarchy or at least a new
understanding of existing

levels.

FN: Wow! I’m terribly flattered. I never
expected such a response. You

are certainly free to pass along the paper to the
people you met at the

University of Nevada.

As it happens, John Kirkland had asked
me about “anticipation” in relation

to the frequently used driving examples and I will try
to post something

relevant to that inquiry here.

In crude form, I think we do anticipate; for instance,
I think we predict

disturbances. In getting to work, I have a route
in mind, a path I intend

following. That is a reference signal for route
traveled. As I move along,

my perceptions inform me that I am on track or off as
the case may be. Up

ahead I see some road construction and barriers that
will force me to take

an exit I did not originally intend taking. I am
knowledgeable of the roads

and streets in the area and I quickly revise my
intended route. Depending

on the extent of the required revision, I might also
have to revise my

intended arrival time. Therein is a big
difference to my way of thinking -

the difference between route and arrival time.

To my way of thinking, route and arrival time are both
variables and both

are potential targets for control. Arrival time,
however, is simply a point

in time and it can be expressed in numeric form as
hour/minute. Route,

however, in my mind or to my way of thinking, is at
least a two-dimensional

matter (e.g., in the form of a map showing streets,
turns, etc). My

perceptions allow me to figure out where I am in that
route and, in

conjunction with my perception of the time and the
progress I’m making,

allow me to gauge whether I am on track or off track
with respect to route

and arrival time. As you said, Bill, it’s a mental model. I’m not
sure

where that kind of thing shows up in the HPCT
hierarchy. I told John

Kirkland I thought
maybe at the level of program (for setting and following

the route).

Anyway, thanks for the compliment and I’ll certainly
ponder this some more.

Regards,

Fred Nickols

Managing Partner

Distance Consulting LLC

1558 Coshcoton Avenue

  • Suite 303

Mount Vernon, OH 43050-5416

www.nickols.us | fred@nickols.us

“Assistance at a Distance”

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

From: Control Systems Group Network (CSGnet)

[mailto:CSGNET@LISTSERV.ILLINOIS.EDU] On Behalf Of Bill Powers

Sent: Friday, March 25, 2011 8:56 AM

To: CSGNET@LISTSERV.ILLINOIS.EDU

Subject: Re: The Target Model and PCT

My late co-founder of PCT, Bob Clark, tried to introduce a level

involving something like what you are proposing. He
referred to it as

“temporal control,” but never was able to
find a useful way to define

or model it. You have made this dimension of control
much clearer,

and I think that if you focus on this for a while with
the target of

fitting your idea into the hierarchy as it now exists,
you can

improve what we have or add something to it. Just keep
thinking “how”

and “why”. What abilities must already exist
to control for ultimate

results, and where in the hierarchy does perception of
the ultimate result

fit?

I’d like permission to copy this paper to the people I
met at a

meeting, Monday and Tuesday, at the University of Nevada.

Best,

Bill P.

Gavin,

I’m trying to learn more about PCT. I’ve been studying and reading a lot about it the last few months and i can say that it’s sinking in slowly just as some on here have said it will.

Would you please tell more about the conversation you had with your sister about her friend’s behavior…not specifics…but what you related to her so she could understand in PCT terms what her friend was trying to do.

Thank you!

Ross

···

On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 7:31 PM, Gavin Ritz garritz@xtra.co.nz wrote:

(Gavin Ritz 2011.03.26.15.21NZT)

[From Fred Nickols
(2011.03.25.0936 PDT)]

Bill Powers
(2011.03.25.0938 Mdt)]

Fred Nickols
(2011.03.21.1447)

I really like these positive and buoyant responses on
the PCT list. They make us want to participate and add value.

There is such a rich amount of stuff in PCT.

I have just come off the Skype with my sister she
lives in Playa del Rey (Calif), explaining to her about the horrendous behaviour of an old friend
of hers.

At the end of the dialogue she totally understood her friend’s
behaviour all in PCT. She got it first time up.

I started by saying to her, your friend isn’t behaving
she’s trying to control her reality.

Great stuff Fred. I’m working hard on this too.

Kind regards

Gavin

BP: Not only is this paper a beautiful application of
PCT, but it’s

beautifully organized and written. And beyond that, it
introduces the

concepts of proximal and ultimate goals, an ordering
not by level but

by time that involves mental models of the world,
which may lead to a

new level in the hierarchy or at least a new
understanding of existing

levels.

FN: Wow! I’m terribly flattered. I never
expected such a response. You

are certainly free to pass along the paper to the
people you met at the

University of Nevada.

As it happens, John Kirkland had asked
me about “anticipation” in relation

to the frequently used driving examples and I will try
to post something

relevant to that inquiry here.

In crude form, I think we do anticipate; for instance,
I think we predict

disturbances. In getting to work, I have a route
in mind, a path I intend

following. That is a reference signal for route
traveled. As I move along,

my perceptions inform me that I am on track or off as
the case may be. Up

ahead I see some road construction and barriers that
will force me to take

an exit I did not originally intend taking. I am
knowledgeable of the roads

and streets in the area and I quickly revise my
intended route. Depending

on the extent of the required revision, I might also
have to revise my

intended arrival time. Therein is a big
difference to my way of thinking -

the difference between route and arrival time.

To my way of thinking, route and arrival time are both
variables and both

are potential targets for control. Arrival time,
however, is simply a point

in time and it can be expressed in numeric form as
hour/minute. Route,

however, in my mind or to my way of thinking, is at
least a two-dimensional

matter (e.g., in the form of a map showing streets,
turns, etc). My

perceptions allow me to figure out where I am in that
route and, in

conjunction with my perception of the time and the
progress I’m making,

allow me to gauge whether I am on track or off track
with respect to route

and arrival time. As you said, Bill, it’s a mental model. I’m not
sure

where that kind of thing shows up in the HPCT
hierarchy. I told John

Kirkland I thought
maybe at the level of program (for setting and following

the route).

Anyway, thanks for the compliment and I’ll certainly
ponder this some more.

Regards,

Fred Nickols

Managing Partner

Distance Consulting LLC

1558 Coshcoton Avenue

  • Suite 303

Mount Vernon, OH 43050-5416

www.nickols.us | fred@nickols.us

“Assistance at a Distance”

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

From: Control Systems Group Network (CSGnet)

[mailto:CSGNET@LISTSERV.ILLINOIS.EDU] On Behalf Of Bill Powers

Sent: Friday, March 25, 2011 8:56 AM

To: CSGNET@LISTSERV.ILLINOIS.EDU

Subject: Re: The Target Model and PCT

My late co-founder of PCT, Bob Clark, tried to introduce a level

involving something like what you are proposing. He
referred to it as

“temporal control,” but never was able to
find a useful way to define

or model it. You have made this dimension of control
much clearer,

and I think that if you focus on this for a while with
the target of

fitting your idea into the hierarchy as it now exists,
you can

improve what we have or add something to it. Just keep
thinking “how”

and “why”. What abilities must already exist
to control for ultimate

results, and where in the hierarchy does perception of
the ultimate result

fit?

I’d like permission to copy this paper to the people I
met at a

meeting, Monday and Tuesday, at the University of Nevada.

Best,

Bill P.

(Gavin Ritz 2011.03.28.15.34NZT)

My sister got it first time up because she knows
nothing about psychology theories.

Her friend abused her verbally because she
sent a txt to her (my other) sister. (I’ve got a whole bunch of them-not abusers
but sisters)

Now my sister knew her friend was trying
to control something but what she didn’t realize was that it her friend’s
own reality that her friend was trying to control. We will never know what that
is.

Everything we “do” or “say”
is about controlling some aspect of our Reality.

Even when we look at an object we are
controlling its shape and hues (both nouns of the word hue). Simply called control
of intensities, sensations and configurations in PCT.

Behavior in PCT does not mean the same
thing as in psychology theories, it means really only one thing “control
of our reality” or in PCT speak Control of Perception.

So when you see the word behavior substitute
it with the words “controlling an individual’s unique reality”.

Try it and see what happens

So when you see the next “loony tune”
just remember that person is only controlling their reality. Maybe they are
quite okay and we are the loony tunes.

You have to find your own unique way in
the understanding of PCT. This is really the key to your creative learning
experience with PCT.

But fire away with questions anytime.

Kind regards

Gavin

Gavin,

I’m trying to learn more about PCT. I’ve been studying and reading a lot about
it the last few months and i can say that it’s sinking in slowly just as some
on here have said it will.

Would you please tell more about the conversation you had with your sister
about her friend’s behavior…not specifics…but what you related to her so
she could understand in PCT terms what her friend was trying to do.

Thank you!

Ross

(Gavin Ritz 2011.03.26.15.21NZT)

[From Fred Nickols (2011.03.25.0936 PDT)]

Bill Powers (2011.03.25.0938 Mdt)]

Fred Nickols (2011.03.21.1447)

I really like these positive
and buoyant responses on the PCT list. They make us want to participate and add
value.

There is such a rich amount
of stuff in PCT.

I have just come off the
Skype with my sister she lives in Playa del Rey (Calif), explaining to her about the
horrendous behaviour of an old friend of hers.

At the end of the dialogue
she totally understood her friend’s behaviour all in PCT. She got it
first time up.

I started by saying to her,
your friend isn’t behaving she’s trying to control her reality.

Great stuff Fred. I’m working hard on this too.

Kind regards

Gavin

···

On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 7:31 PM, Gavin Ritz garritz@xtra.co.nz wrote:

BP: Not only is this paper a
beautiful application of PCT, but it’s

beautifully organized and
written. And beyond that, it introduces the

concepts of proximal and
ultimate goals, an ordering not by level but

by time that involves mental
models of the world, which may lead to a

new level in the hierarchy
or at least a new understanding of existing

levels.

FN: Wow! I’m terribly
flattered. I never expected such a response. You

are certainly free to pass
along the paper to the people you met at the

University of Nevada.

As it happens, John Kirkland had asked me about “anticipation” in relation

to the frequently used
driving examples and I will try to post something

relevant to that inquiry
here.

In crude form, I think we do
anticipate; for instance, I think we predict

disturbances. In
getting to work, I have a route in mind, a path I intend

following. That is a
reference signal for route traveled. As I move along,

my perceptions inform me
that I am on track or off as the case may be. Up

ahead I see some road
construction and barriers that will force me to take

an exit I did not originally
intend taking. I am knowledgeable of the roads

and streets in the area and
I quickly revise my intended route. Depending

on the extent of the
required revision, I might also have to revise my

intended arrival time.
Therein is a big difference to my way of thinking -

the difference between route
and arrival time.

To my way of thinking, route
and arrival time are both variables and both

are potential targets for
control. Arrival time, however, is simply a point

in time and it can be
expressed in numeric form as hour/minute. Route,

however, in my mind or to my
way of thinking, is at least a two-dimensional

matter (e.g., in the form of
a map showing streets, turns, etc). My

perceptions allow me to
figure out where I am in that route and, in

conjunction with my
perception of the time and the progress I’m making,

allow me to gauge whether I
am on track or off track with respect to route

and arrival time. As
you said, Bill, it’s a
mental model. I’m not sure

where that kind of thing
shows up in the HPCT hierarchy. I told John

Kirkland I thought maybe at the level of program (for setting and following

the route).

Anyway, thanks for the
compliment and I’ll certainly ponder this some more.

Regards,

Fred Nickols

Managing Partner

Distance Consulting LLC

1558 Coshcoton Avenue - Suite 303

Mount Vernon, OH 43050-5416

www.nickols.us | fred@nickols.us

“Assistance at a
Distance”

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

From: Control Systems Group
Network (CSGnet)

[mailto:CSGNET@LISTSERV.ILLINOIS.EDU]
On Behalf Of Bill Powers

Sent: Friday, March 25, 2011 8:56 AM

To: CSGNET@LISTSERV.ILLINOIS.EDU

Subject: Re: The Target
Model and PCT

My late co-founder of PCT, Bob Clark, tried to introduce a level

involving something like
what you are proposing. He referred to it as

“temporal
control,” but never was able to find a useful way to define

or model it. You have made
this dimension of control much clearer,

and I think that if you
focus on this for a while with the target of

fitting your idea into the
hierarchy as it now exists, you can

improve what we have or add
something to it. Just keep thinking “how”

and “why”. What
abilities must already exist to control for ultimate

results, and where in the hierarchy
does perception of the ultimate result

fit?

I’d like permission to copy
this paper to the people I met at a

meeting, Monday and Tuesday,
at the University of Nevada.

Best,

Bill P.

(Gavin Ritz 2011.03.28.16.27NZT)

Afterthought

The weird thing is that people like my sister’s
friend all seem to control very similar reality’s.

Here are just some of the observations.

  •  They never seem to be able to
    
    take responsibility for their actions (control of their own reality)
  •  They always blame the persons
    
    closer to them for just about everything.
  •  Seem to lose the plot very easily
    
    and quickly.
  •  Have some very weird views of
    
    society (often conspiracy stuff).
  •  Don’t form relationships
    
    very easily and when they do they are always troubled.
  •  Always in conflict with others
    
    but mostly with themselves

What “Reality’s are they controlling”?

Gavin,

I’m trying to learn more about PCT. I’ve been studying and reading a lot about
it the last few months and i can say that it’s sinking in slowly just as some
on here have said it will.

Would you please tell more about the conversation you had with your sister
about her friend’s behavior…not specifics…but what you related to her so
she could understand in PCT terms what her friend was trying to do.

Thank you!

Ross

(Gavin Ritz 2011.03.26.15.21NZT)

[From Fred Nickols (2011.03.25.0936 PDT)]

Bill Powers (2011.03.25.0938 Mdt)]

Fred Nickols (2011.03.21.1447)

I really like these positive
and buoyant responses on the PCT list. They make us want to participate and add
value.

There is such a rich amount
of stuff in PCT.

I have just come off the
Skype with my sister she lives in Playa del Rey (Calif), explaining to her about the
horrendous behaviour of an old friend of hers.

At the end of the dialogue
she totally understood her friend’s behaviour all in PCT. She got it
first time up.

I started by saying to her,
your friend isn’t behaving she’s trying to control her reality.

Great stuff Fred. I’m working hard on this too.

Kind regards

Gavin

···

On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 7:31 PM, Gavin Ritz garritz@xtra.co.nz wrote:

BP: Not only is this paper a
beautiful application of PCT, but it’s

beautifully organized and
written. And beyond that, it introduces the

concepts of proximal and
ultimate goals, an ordering not by level but

by time that involves mental
models of the world, which may lead to a

new level in the hierarchy
or at least a new understanding of existing

levels.

FN: Wow! I’m terribly
flattered. I never expected such a response. You

are certainly free to pass
along the paper to the people you met at the

University of Nevada.

As it happens, John Kirkland had asked me about “anticipation” in relation

to the frequently used
driving examples and I will try to post something

relevant to that inquiry
here.

In crude form, I think we do
anticipate; for instance, I think we predict

disturbances. In
getting to work, I have a route in mind, a path I intend

following. That is a
reference signal for route traveled. As I move along,

my perceptions inform me
that I am on track or off as the case may be. Up

ahead I see some road
construction and barriers that will force me to take

an exit I did not originally
intend taking. I am knowledgeable of the roads

and streets in the area and
I quickly revise my intended route. Depending

on the extent of the
required revision, I might also have to revise my

intended arrival time.
Therein is a big difference to my way of thinking -

the difference between route
and arrival time.

To my way of thinking, route
and arrival time are both variables and both

are potential targets for
control. Arrival time, however, is simply a point

in time and it can be
expressed in numeric form as hour/minute. Route,

however, in my mind or to my
way of thinking, is at least a two-dimensional

matter (e.g., in the form of
a map showing streets, turns, etc). My

perceptions allow me to
figure out where I am in that route and, in

conjunction with my
perception of the time and the progress I’m making,

allow me to gauge whether I
am on track or off track with respect to route

and arrival time. As
you said, Bill, it’s a
mental model. I’m not sure

where that kind of thing
shows up in the HPCT hierarchy. I told John

Kirkland I thought maybe at the level of program (for setting and following

the route).

Anyway, thanks for the
compliment and I’ll certainly ponder this some more.

Regards,

Fred Nickols

Managing Partner

Distance Consulting LLC

1558 Coshcoton Avenue - Suite 303

Mount Vernon, OH 43050-5416

www.nickols.us | fred@nickols.us

“Assistance at a
Distance”

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

From: Control Systems Group
Network (CSGnet)

[mailto:CSGNET@LISTSERV.ILLINOIS.EDU]
On Behalf Of Bill Powers

Sent: Friday, March 25, 2011 8:56 AM

To: CSGNET@LISTSERV.ILLINOIS.EDU

Subject: Re: The Target
Model and PCT

My late co-founder of PCT, Bob Clark, tried to introduce a level

involving something like
what you are proposing. He referred to it as

“temporal
control,” but never was able to find a useful way to define

or model it. You have made
this dimension of control much clearer,

and I think that if you
focus on this for a while with the target of

fitting your idea into the
hierarchy as it now exists, you can

improve what we have or add
something to it. Just keep thinking “how”

and “why”. What
abilities must already exist to control for ultimate

results, and where in the
hierarchy does perception of the ultimate result

fit?

I’d like permission to copy
this paper to the people I met at a

meeting, Monday and Tuesday,
at the University of Nevada.

Best,

Bill P.

I feel you described me in many ways in your ‘Afterthought’…now i want to try and change some of that if possible and that’s what
fueled my interest in PCT to begin with…“why do I/others do what we do?”

So, some people are better controllers of their reality’s than others.

Why is that? Is it just natural for some to be better controllers…and are some destined to never ‘get it’?

Or is the solution for those people aren’t good controllers of their reality’s to use the information of HPCT to organize

and gain better control of their lives?

How would I begin to go about reorganizing?

You ended your last post with the statement What “Reality’s are they controlling”? What do you mean when you say ‘reality’s’? I think i get it but…reality’s would be what the person is aiming at; what they want, their goal(s)? Is there more to 'reality’s than this?

···

On Sun, Mar 27, 2011 at 8:38 PM, Gavin Ritz garritz@xtra.co.nz wrote:

(Gavin Ritz 2011.03.28.16.27NZT)

Afterthought

The weird thing is that people like my sister’s
friend all seem to control very similar reality’s.

Here are just some of the observations.

  •  They never seem to be able to
    
    take responsibility for their actions (control of their own reality)
  •  They always blame the persons
    
    closer to them for just about everything.
  •  Seem to lose the plot very easily
    
    and quickly.
  •  Have some very weird views of
    
    society (often conspiracy stuff).
  •  Don’t form relationships
    
    very easily and when they do they are always troubled.
  •  Always in conflict with others
    
    but mostly with themselves

What “Reality’s are they controlling”?

Gavin,

I’m trying to learn more about PCT. I’ve been studying and reading a lot about
it the last few months and i can say that it’s sinking in slowly just as some
on here have said it will.

Would you please tell more about the conversation you had with your sister
about her friend’s behavior…not specifics…but what you related to her so
she could understand in PCT terms what her friend was trying to do.

Thank you!

Ross

On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 7:31 PM, Gavin Ritz garritz@xtra.co.nz > wrote:

(Gavin Ritz 2011.03.26.15.21NZT)

[From Fred Nickols (2011.03.25.0936 PDT)]

Bill Powers (2011.03.25.0938 Mdt)]

Fred Nickols (2011.03.21.1447)

I really like these positive
and buoyant responses on the PCT list. They make us want to participate and add
value.

There is such a rich amount
of stuff in PCT.

I have just come off the
Skype with my sister she lives in Playa del Rey (Calif), explaining to her about the
horrendous behaviour of an old friend of hers.

At the end of the dialogue
she totally understood her friend’s behaviour all in PCT. She got it
first time up.

I started by saying to her,
your friend isn’t behaving she’s trying to control her reality.

Great stuff Fred. I’m working hard on this too.

Kind regards

Gavin

BP: Not only is this paper a
beautiful application of PCT, but it’s

beautifully organized and
written. And beyond that, it introduces the

concepts of proximal and
ultimate goals, an ordering not by level but

by time that involves mental
models of the world, which may lead to a

new level in the hierarchy
or at least a new understanding of existing

levels.

FN: Wow! I’m terribly
flattered. I never expected such a response. You

are certainly free to pass
along the paper to the people you met at the

University of Nevada.

As it happens, John Kirkland had asked me about “anticipation” in relation

to the frequently used
driving examples and I will try to post something

relevant to that inquiry
here.

In crude form, I think we do
anticipate; for instance, I think we predict

disturbances. In
getting to work, I have a route in mind, a path I intend

following. That is a
reference signal for route traveled. As I move along,

my perceptions inform me
that I am on track or off as the case may be. Up

ahead I see some road
construction and barriers that will force me to take

an exit I did not originally
intend taking. I am knowledgeable of the roads

and streets in the area and
I quickly revise my intended route. Depending

on the extent of the
required revision, I might also have to revise my

intended arrival time.
Therein is a big difference to my way of thinking -

the difference between route
and arrival time.

To my way of thinking, route
and arrival time are both variables and both

are potential targets for
control. Arrival time, however, is simply a point

in time and it can be
expressed in numeric form as hour/minute. Route,

however, in my mind or to my
way of thinking, is at least a two-dimensional

matter (e.g., in the form of
a map showing streets, turns, etc). My

perceptions allow me to
figure out where I am in that route and, in

conjunction with my
perception of the time and the progress I’m making,

allow me to gauge whether I
am on track or off track with respect to route

and arrival time. As
you said, Bill, it’s a
mental model. I’m not sure

where that kind of thing
shows up in the HPCT hierarchy. I told John

Kirkland I thought maybe at the level of program (for setting and following

the route).

Anyway, thanks for the
compliment and I’ll certainly ponder this some more.

Regards,

Fred Nickols

Managing Partner

Distance Consulting LLC

1558 Coshcoton Avenue - Suite 303

Mount Vernon, OH 43050-5416

www.nickols.us | fred@nickols.us

“Assistance at a
Distance”

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

From: Control Systems Group
Network (CSGnet)

[mailto:CSGNET@LISTSERV.ILLINOIS.EDU]
On Behalf Of Bill Powers

Sent: Friday, March 25, 2011 8:56 AM

To: CSGNET@LISTSERV.ILLINOIS.EDU

Subject: Re: The Target
Model and PCT

My late co-founder of PCT, Bob Clark, tried to introduce a level

involving something like
what you are proposing. He referred to it as

“temporal
control,” but never was able to find a useful way to define

or model it. You have made
this dimension of control much clearer,

and I think that if you
focus on this for a while with the target of

fitting your idea into the
hierarchy as it now exists, you can

improve what we have or add
something to it. Just keep thinking “how”

and “why”. What
abilities must already exist to control for ultimate

results, and where in the
hierarchy does perception of the ultimate result

fit?

I’d like permission to copy
this paper to the people I met at a

meeting, Monday and Tuesday,
at the University of Nevada.

Best,

Bill P.