The Test (was The Sting)

[From Rick Marken (990410.1940)]

Bruce Gregory (990410.2110 EDT)--

I agree, it [bombing] is only the first step. The next step is
to see if he is controlling the perception "not waging ground
war".

I think looking at what NATO is doing in Yugoslavia as a test for
controlled variables is no better than looking at what conventional
psychologists are doing in their labs as a test for controlled
variables. In neither case is there any attempt to identify a
possible controlled variable or measure it's value during disturbance
(to say nothing of trying to determine whether the system under study
can actually detect and influence the hypothetical controlled
variable).

Bombing is a potential disturbance to many perceptual variables;
number of casualties, number of comm terminals destroyed, etc. In
order to determine whether any of these variables is under control
you would have to determine what _would_ happen to these variables
as a result of bombing if they were _not_ under control (what would
the casualty rate be, for example, if Milosovic were not controlling
this variable) and what actually happens (determine whether the
casualty rate is consistently lower or _higher_ than expected -- the
latter occuring if civilians are interntionally placed in harm's
way to make NATO look particularly bad).

I really think you would get a better idea of what is involved
in testing for controlled variables if you would play the Coin
Game (as described in B:CP, Ch. 16) a few times with someone you
love (a nice "quality time" experience). I think you will see
that trying to figure out what perception a person is controlling
is nothing like what NATO is trying to do in Yugoslavia (prod
"decent" responses from Milosovic) or what conventional psychologists
are trying to do in the lab (prod _any_ response from their subjects).

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 Bruce Gregory (990411.1010 EST)]

Rick Marken (990410.1940)

I think looking at what NATO is doing in Yugoslavia as a test for
controlled variables is no better than looking at what conventional
psychologists are doing in their labs as a test for controlled
variables. In neither case is there any attempt to identify a
possible controlled variable or measure it's value during disturbance
(to say nothing of trying to determine whether the system under study
can actually detect and influence the hypothetical controlled
variable).

The point, dear Richard, is that what NATO is doing is betting its resources
that it can coerce Milosevic by bombing his troops and "military
infrastructure." In effect, NATO is committed to the position that they know
what Milosevic is controlling, _without_ conducting the Test or even
understanding what they are doing. The point is not that NATO knows anything
about the Test or is trying to conduct the Test.

Bruce Gregory

[From Rick Marken (990411.0830)]

Me:

I think looking at what NATO is doing in Yugoslavia as a test for
controlled variables is no better than looking at what conventional
psychologists are doing in their labs as a test for controlled
variables...

Bruce Gregory (990411.1010 EST)

The point, dear Richard, is that what NATO is doing is betting
its resources that it can coerce Milosevic by bombing his troops
and "military infrastructure."

I thought your point was that we should look at what NATO is
is doing (rather than at what conventional psychologists are doing)
to see an example of testing for controlled variables. At least,
it seemed like that was what you were saying in your original post
on the sumject:

Bruce Gregory (90410.1730) --

I think you may be looking in the wrong place for people
conducting the Test. Even as we speak, NATO is convincingly
demonstrating that Milosevic is _not_ controlling his perception
of "being bombed."

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 Bruce Gregory (990411.1240 EDT)]

Rick Marken (990411.0830)

I thought your point was that we should look at what NATO is
is doing (rather than at what conventional psychologists are doing)
to see an example of testing for controlled variables. At least,
it seemed like that was what you were saying in your original post
on the subject:

Bruce Gregory (90410.1730) --

> I think you may be looking in the wrong place for people
> conducting the Test. Even as we speak, NATO is convincingly
> demonstrating that Milosevic is _not_ controlling his perception
> of "being bombed."

I apologize. I keep forgetting how literally you interpret everything. I'll
try to avoid even mild irony in the future.

Bruce Gregory

[From Bruce Gregory (904111315 EDT)]

Rick Marken (990411.1010)

I guess I really am sense-of-humor impaired. Where is the irony
in saying that we should look to NATO rather than conventional
psychology for people conducting the Test?

Sigh... From NATO's point of view, Milosevic is a stimulus-response
device--bomb his troops enough and he will surrender (or, even less
probably, the Yugoslav's will rise up and depose him (has this _ever_
happened as a result of bombing a country?). We know that Milosevic is
really a control-of-input device. We observe that since what NATO is doing
is not working, Milosevic is _not_ controlling certain perceptions with high
gain. To me, the lesson is that it is very dangerous to think that you can
guess what perception someone else is controlling. And yet this is what many
people do all the time.

Bruce Gregory

[From Rick Marken (990411.1010)]

Me:

I thought your point was that we should look at what NATO is
is doing (rather than at what conventional psychologists are doing)
to see an example of testing for controlled variables. At least,
it seemed like that was what you were saying in your original post
on the subject:

Bruce Gregory (90410.1730) --

> I think you may be looking in the wrong place for people
> conducting the Test. Even as we speak, NATO is convincingly
> demonstrating that Milosevic is _not_ controlling his perception
> of "being bombed."

Bruce Gregory (990411.1240 EDT)]

I apologize. I keep forgetting how literally you interpret
everything. I'll try to avoid even mild irony in the future.

I guess I really am sense-of-humor impaired. Where is the irony
in saying that we should look to NATO rather than conventional
psychology for people conducting the Test?

Best

Rick

···

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