The Triumph of PCT

[From Rick Marken (960731.1415)]

Tom Bourbon (950730.1315) --

If that isn't a description of the plan-driven input-output (S-R) model that
Bill Powers and I used in "Models and their worlds," I'll eat the floppy
disk on which I stored our manuscript after its final rejection.

Martin Taylor (950731 14:00) --

That COULD be a description of plan-driven input-output. It NEED not be.
I suggest a little salt might go well with the floppy.

Yes. You and Bruce Abbott have convinced me that the pages of the
psychological journals are filled with descriptions of what is essentially
PCT along with well executed PCT research. That may be why the PCT articles
for IJHMS haven't been forthcoming. Those of us who planned to write those
articles have realized thatt PCT is already well understood in psychology so
we're planning to allocate our behavior to other pursuits;-)

Best

Rick

[Martin Taylor 950731 1800]

Rick Marken (960731.1415)

You and Bruce Abbott have convinced me that the pages of the
psychological journals are filled with descriptions of what is essentially
PCT along with well executed PCT research.

A very puzzling comment. I can't remember discussing the content of
psychological journals very often, if ever. And as I remember, on the
occasion on which you are commenting, I explicitly noted that there was
no sign that the authors knew anything about control. My point was that
nothing in the abstract, the graphs, or the passage quoted by Tom was
INconsistent with HPCT, though Tom asserted that such an inconsistency
was quite apparent.

That may be why the PCT articles
for IJHMS haven't been forthcoming.

I suppose you MUST need a reason for not writing the paper you have several
times promised for a date usually two months or so from the date of the
promise.

Those of us who planned to write those
articles have realized thatt PCT is already well understood in psychology so
we're planning to allocate our behavior to other pursuits;-)

If it were well understood in psychology, then you could write a much
deeper paper, couldn't you? People who write in a well-understood paradigm
can say a lot more in less space than can people who are writing to the
great unwashed. I haven't noticed that poeple in other fields of psychology
refuse to write because the potential readership might understand what
they have to say :wink:

Would be nice if what you say were true. But it isn't.

Martin