X-Envelope-to: CSG-L@vmd.cso.uiuc.edu
X-VMS-To: @CSG
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.csg-l
Date:         Mon, 5 Oct 1992 10:10:29 -0600
From:         "William T. Powers" <POWERS_W%FLC@VAXF.COLORADO.EDU>
Subject:      reorganization

[From Bill Powers (921005.0900)]

Greg Williams (921003) --

>Note that I have included BOTH "learning" AND "reorganization" in
>3. Do you think we DON'T need to postulate something "less" than
>reorganization in cases which Gary has raised, such as learning how
>to multiply (where it appears that (1) the learner's control system
>is altered and (2) there is no critical error triggering the
>learning)?

Why does it appear that there is no critical error "triggering" the
learning of multiplication? I've looked at this sort of learning the
other way around: multiplication requires learning to control a new
pattern of perceptions; therefore reorganization must occur. If
reorganization occurs, what sort of critical variable departs from its
reference level and is restored by successful learning? This kind of
critical error would have to occur not specifically for learning
multiplication, but for learning anything of that sort, under the
conditions that exist at the time of learning.

There are some obvious answers and some not-so-obvious answers. The
obvious answers involve the coercive atmosphere of school, in which
not learning means confinement, disapproval, and punishment. For most
children the motivation for learning to multiply consists of all the
things that are done to them until they do learn -- more specifically,
the emotional consequences and the underlying state of internal
disorder resulting from the things that are done to them at school and
at home until the time when they demonstrate to someone else's
satisfaction that they know how to multiply.

The not-so-obvious answers would concern mainly those few children who
learn to multiply because they think this is a totally neat new skill
and they can't wait to find out how to do it. Critical variables, as I
have maintained from the start, are not confined to the vegetative
functions, although they are easiest to understand in terms of
biochemical functions that underlie hunger, thirst, and so on. All
that is required to define a critical variable is that it represent a
condition of the organism that is genetically specified, that it can
be detected by a built-in critical-variable detector, and that it lead
to reorganization when it departs from its inherited reference level.

The learning of multiplication would certainly not itself be a
critical variable; that is, there is no built-in reference level for
learning multiplication or any other specific cognitive skill. But
there could be built-in detectors and reference signals that are
satisfied when ANY new skill is acquired, when ANY previously-
experienced perception is brought under skilful control, at ANY level
of organization. That sort of critical reference level could be
inherited, so it could be operational from early during gestation. It
would account for a generalized urge to learn new skills, at any level
including the highest one currently under construction. And it would
satisfy my demand that evolution not be required to function on the
basis of future conditions of the environment that have only ephemeral
existence, such as a particular cultures, languages, or most-admired
sets of skills.

I've proposed one such critical variable, which is simply the absolute
magnitude of the error signal in any control system. It doesn't matter
what this error signal is about; all that matters is that it become as
small as possible.

If teaching relied on the built-in reference signals for critical
variables having to do with learning new skills, it would not be
necessary to force learning by induction of critical errors of
irrelevant kinds. Simply not knowing how to reproduce an observed
skill would be enough, if the skill seemed interesting. Unfortunately,
the educational system is so fundamentally coercive that few students
have time to discover the innate joy of learning. They are too busy
learning how to avoid the penalties of NOT learning that the
educational system arbitrarily imposes.
------------------------------------------------------------------
Best,


Bill P.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU