Video on PCT and Darwin (RE: An study essay on PCT)

Dear Warren

Yes your message went through already. I am sorry that I did not comment it. That was interesting (though I’m very bad listening English) - Like
your other videos which I now found from youtube.

Terv. Eetu Pikkarainen

···

From: Warren Mansell [mailto:wmansell@gmail.com]
Sent: 14. marraskuuta 2016 10:53
To: csgnet@lists.illinois.edu
Subject: Re: An study essay on PCT

Hi everyone, I am not sure if my responses are getting through when I write a new email, so I am trying via a reply. Here is a new video on PCT and Darwin, you might like:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vQ3lY1U60MM

On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 8:35 AM, Eetu Pikkarainen eetu.pikkarainen@oulu.fi wrote:

[eetu pikkarainen 2016-11-14]

Thank you Bob for comments!

  1. Really, the difference between energy and information values of both input and output
    is an important question. Principally the distinction between action and doing is that of whole and part, but there is more, just as you thought.

  2. Yes, PCT offers this helpful new distinction between objects and subjects in the
    environment. (I would add that especially human beings can initiate doings with relatively low internal energy which may have huge external consequences…)

  3. This question has been traditionally discussed in educational theories, especially
    those called dialogical. But this has happened from quite idealistic premises.

  4. I have thought on the basis of Greimassian semiotics that grasping or recognizing
    the meaning of any external experience is always immediate and not-deliberated. This does not necessarily lead to external doings, but something happens inside, as you said. Only afterwards we can start to interpret and “make meanings� (as s saying goes).
    We can deliberate alternatives of doing as you well described - probably there is always an internal conflict when we resist temptations? All this I have called internal action in my model.

I would love to read your papers you mentioned. Could you try to send them straight
to my email: eetu.pikkarainen@oulu.fi ?

Best wishes,

Eetu Pikkarainen

From: Bob
Hintz [mailto:bob.hintz@gmail.com]
Sent: 12. marraskuuta 2016 0:28
To: csgnet@lists.illinois.edu
Subject: Re: An study essay on PCT

bob hintz 11-11-16

I enjoyed reading your document. As this seems to be part of a larger and more philosophical effort. My comments are directed toward what I am imagining that larger work is directed
toward.

  1. I have been thinking about the difference between the energy value of an output and the information value of that same output. I am not clear about the distinction between
    action and doing, but I am guessing that if I pull a chair out from a table and sit down, that would be a doing. If you are already sitting at that same table and recognize me, then my doing might signal the action of joining you for a meal. On the other
    hand, if you don’t recognize me, my doing might signal an inappropriate intrusion in your physical space. The meaning of my doing for the other person will depend on their interpretation and their output will provide information about that interpretation
    which will be related to my doing but might be quite different from my intended action.

  2. An external environment that includes other human beings or even just other life forms is different from an environment that includes only objects. Objects do not initiate
    doing and can only react on the basis of energy transfer and mechanical laws. Subjects can initiate doing utilizing internally available energy organized in terms of their own references.

  3. An internal environment involves physiological, psychological and sociological levels of control that require interaction with subjects other than oneself. Some of these others,
    I eat. Some I avoid because they will try to eat me. Some I join with to reproduce. In the case of humans, some I join with to create the world that we live in. Social interaction always involves at least two subjects and is different from subject/object
    interaction. Teachers who treat students as objects are seldom competent even though some students might succeed in learning something from such teachers.

  4. Some external perceptions elicit immediate physiological responses (fight/flight/freeze) without conscious interpretation even though they might be judged inaccurate a moment
    later, ie., the snake that turns out to be stick. Some internal perceptions enter consciousness but don’t result in any doing, ie., I really want a drink or a cigarette but am trying to quit. This is an action that only the actor might perceive.

I have two papers published 20 years ago that I have permission to share, if anyone is interested. One deals with conflict and the other written with Dan Miller deals with joined
action. I know I can send them to individuals. I tried to post one here, but it bounced.

bob

On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 11:00 AM, Eetu Pikkarainen eetu.pikkarainen@oulu.fi wrote:

Dear list
I want to share the first draft of a writing I had to do to digest PCT.
Comments and corrections are welcome.
I am sorry that here are no proper citations in this version.
(and the English is what it is)

Eetu Pikkarainen

Dr Warren Mansell
Reader in Clinical Psychology

School of Health Sciences
2nd Floor Zochonis Building
University of Manchester
Oxford Road
Manchester M13 9PL
Email: warren.mansell@manchester.ac.uk

Tel: +44 (0) 161 275 8589

Website:
http://www.psych-sci.manchester.ac.uk/staff/131406

Advanced notice of a new transdiagnostic therapy manual, authored by Carey, Mansell & Tai -

Principles-Based Counselling and Psychotherapy: A Method of Levels Approach

Available Now

Check
www.pctweb.org
for further information on Perceptual Control Theory

Thanks Eetu!

···

On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 8:58 AM, Eetu Pikkarainen eetu.pikkarainen@oulu.fi wrote:

Dear Warren

Yes your message went through already. I am sorry that I did not comment it. That was interesting (though I’m very bad listening English) - Like
your other videos which I now found from youtube.

Â

Terv. Eetu Pikkarainen

Â

From: Warren Mansell [mailto:wmansell@gmail.com]
Sent: 14. marraskuuta 2016 10:53
To: csgnet@lists.illinois.edu
Subject: Re: An study essay on PCT

Â

Hi everyone, I am not sure if my responses are getting through when I write a new email, so I am trying via a reply. Here is a new video on PCT and Darwin, you might like:Â

Â

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vQ3lY1U60MM

Â

Â

Â

On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 8:35 AM, Eetu Pikkarainen eetu.pikkarainen@oulu.fi wrote:

[eetu pikkarainen 2016-11-14]

Â

Thank you Bob for comments!

Â

  1. Really, the difference between energy and information values of both input and output
    is an important question. Principally the distinction between  action and doing is that of whole and part, but there is more, just as you thought.

Â

  1. Yes, PCT offers this helpful new distinction between objects and subjects in the
    environment. (I would add that especially human beings can initiate doings with relatively low internal energy which may have huge external consequences…)

Â

  1. This question has been traditionally discussed in educational theories, especially
    those called dialogical. But this has happened from quite idealistic premises.

Â

  1. I have thought on the basis of Greimassian semiotics that grasping or recognizing
    the meaning of any external experience is always immediate and not-deliberated. This does not necessarily lead to external doings, but something happens inside, as you said. Only afterwards we can start to interpret and “make meanings� (as s saying goes).
    We can deliberate alternatives of doing as you well described - probably there is always an internal conflict when we resist temptations? All this I have called internal action in my model.

Â

I would love to read your papers you mentioned. Could you try to send them straight
to my email: eetu.pikkarainen@oulu.fi ?

Â

Â

Best wishes,

Eetu Pikkarainen

Â

From: Bob
Hintz [mailto:bob.hintz@gmail.com]
Sent: 12. marraskuuta 2016 0:28
To: csgnet@lists.illinois.edu
Subject: Re: An study essay on PCT

Â

bob hintz 11-11-16

Â

I enjoyed reading your document. As this seems to be part of a larger and more philosophical effort. My comments are directed toward what I am imagining that larger work is directed
toward.

Â

1. I have been thinking about the difference between the energy value of an output and the information value of that same output. I am not clear about the distinction between
action and doing, but I am guessing that if I pull a chair out from a table and sit down, that would be a doing. If you are already sitting at that same table and recognize me, then my doing might signal the action of joining you for a meal. On the other
hand, if you don’t recognize me, my doing might signal an inappropriate intrusion in your physical space. The meaning of my doing for the other person will depend on their interpretation and their output will provide information about that interpretation
which will be related to my doing but might be quite different from my intended action.

Â

2. An external environment that includes other human beings or even just other life forms is different from an environment that includes only objects. Objects do not initiate
doing and can only react on the basis of energy transfer and mechanical laws. Subjects can initiate doing utilizing internally available energy organized in terms of their own references.

Â

3. An internal environment involves physiological, psychological and sociological levels of control that require interaction with subjects other than oneself. Some of these others,
I eat. Some I avoid because they will try to eat me. Some I join with to reproduce. In the case of humans, some I join with to create the world that we live in. Social interaction always involves at least two subjects and is different from subject/object
interaction. Teachers who treat students as objects are seldom competent even though some students might succeed in learning something from such teachers.

Â

  1. Some external perceptions elicit immediate physiological responses (fight/flight/freeze) without conscious interpretation even though they might be judged inaccurate a moment
    later, ie., the snake that turns out to be stick. Some internal perceptions enter consciousness but don’t result in any doing, ie., I really want a drink or a cigarette but am trying to quit. This is an action that only the actor might perceive. Â

Â

I have two papers published 20 years ago that I have permission to share, if anyone is interested. One deals with conflict and the other written with Dan Miller deals with joined
action. I know I can send them to individuals. I tried to post one here, but it bounced.

Â

bob

Â

On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 11:00 AM, Eetu Pikkarainen eetu.pikkarainen@oulu.fi wrote:

Dear list
I want to share the first draft of a writing I had to do to digest PCT.
Comments and corrections are welcome.
I am sorry that here are no proper citations in this version.
(and the English is what it is)

Eetu Pikkarainen

Â

Â

Dr Warren Mansell
Reader in Clinical Psychology

School of Health Sciences
2nd Floor Zochonis Building
University of Manchester
Oxford Road
Manchester M13 9PL
Email: warren.mansell@manchester.ac.uk
Â
Tel: +44 (0) 161 275 8589
Â
Website:
http://www.psych-sci.manchester.ac.uk/staff/131406

Â
Advanced notice of a new transdiagnostic therapy manual, authored by Carey, Mansell & Tai -

Principles-Based Counselling and Psychotherapy: A Method of Levels Approach

Available Now

Check
www.pctweb.org
for further information on Perceptual Control Theory

Â

Dr Warren Mansell
Reader in Clinical Psychology

School of Health Sciences
2nd Floor Zochonis Building
University of Manchester
Oxford Road
Manchester M13 9PL
Email: warren.mansell@manchester.ac.uk
Â
Tel: +44 (0) 161 275 8589
Â
Website: http://www.psych-sci.manchester.ac.uk/staff/131406
Â
Advanced notice of a new transdiagnostic therapy manual, authored by Carey, Mansell & Tai - Principles-Based Counselling and Psychotherapy: A Method of Levels Approach

Available Now

Check www.pctweb.org for further information on Perceptual Control Theory