HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
X-Mailer: Mail User's Shell (6.5.6 6/30/89)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.csg-l
Date:         Thu, 24 Dec 1992 12:06:37 MET
From:         Maler <maler@IMAG.FR>
Subject:      Re: PCT Fanatics

[From Oded Maler (921224)]

* [From Rick Marken (921223.1300)]
*
* OK, nobody's in the office; I should be home cuddled up by the
* Christmas tree (yes, I prefer celebrating the apocryphal birth of
* the prince of peace to the non - apocryphal victory of the Macabees
* over the Assyrians [or whomever]).

I'm writing this before reading the rest of the message, although I
can predict (with 95% accuracy) the rest from the title..
I hope I'll be able to respond after the Fois Gras festival is over.

I suppose the historical error was meant to be a trap, so in
short my interpretation of Hanukka is the victory of mid-eastern
spiritualism  over helenic/western materialism (it were not the
Assyrians but the Syrian/Greek part the post Alexander empire).
The second incarnation of such a victory was the Khomeini revolution.
But all that belongs to domains were the PCT still does not have
(and will not have, in this rate of development) generative models.
I will also not enter in this son-of-a-god business.

So I want to wish you all PCTers, real or phoney, blind or deaf,
armchair philosphers, experimentalists and rejection-record breakers,
a happy new year. I don't know how many AHA's I had since I started
reading CSG-L but I surely had a lot of HMMM's and I thank you for that.

--Oded

--
===============================================================
Oded Maler, LGI-IMAG (Campus), B.P. 53x, 38041 Grenoble, France
Phone:  76635846  Fax: 76446675   e-mail: maler@vercors.imag.fr
===============================================================
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.csg-l
Date:         Tue, 29 Dec 1992 13:49:12 EST
From:         mmt@BEN.DCIEM.DND.CA
Subject: Re: Conflict and Control

[Martin Taylor 921229 13:45]
(Rick Marken 921229.0800)

Rick,

Your experiments on conflict sound great.  Would it be too much to ask for
a copy of your HyperCard stack?  I promise not to do anything with it to
pre-empt you (I don't have access to experimental subjects, anyway), but
I might be able to send you some proposed test conditions or script
modifications that could link into (a) Bomb, (b) superstition, or
(c) information theory (no promises on any of them).

For this kind of thing, HyperCard sounds like a good way to go.
(Isn't there a translator to an HC look-alike on IBM compatibles, too?
That would let Bill P look at it.)

Martin
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"CSG-L@UIUCVMD.BITNET"
Original_cc:  TBOURBON
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.csg-l
Date:         Wed, 23 Dec 1992 08:46:00 CDT
From:         Tom Bourbon <TBOURBON@UTMBEACH.BITNET>
Subject:      RE: On the lighter side

From Tom Bourbon (921223 08:43  CST -- by the dim light of a new and
                   foggy day amid the palms)
Thanks, Bill Cunningham, for a luminous little post with which to start
the day.  To you, and everyone else on csg-l, may Boss Reality tred
lightly on the controlled variables of you and of those you love.
Happy holidays.
   Tom Bourbon
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Posted-Date: Thu, 31 Dec 92 09:15:26 PST
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.csg-l
Date:         Thu, 31 Dec 1992 09:15:26 PST
From:         marken@AERO.ORG
Subject:      Happy 1993

[From Rick Marken (921231.0900)]

Well, it's pretty quiet out there. It's either the lull
at the end of the year of Bill Powers' vax is still down.

Anyway, let me be the first to wish Avery Andrews a Happy
New Year; since he is the first on CSGNet (I think?) to
experience 1993 -- How is it, Avery?

May 1993 see the end of many more cherished beliefs (like
trickle down economics).

Better yet, may 1993 be the year when people start enjoying
their beliefs as beliefs -- and stop mistaking them for
knowledge and understanding.

Feliz Ano Nuevo

Rick

     **************************************************************

Richard S. Marken                   USMail: 10459 Holman Ave
The Aerospace Corporation                   Los Angeles, CA 90024
E-mail: marken@aero.org
(310) 336-6215 (day)
(310) 474-0313 (evening)
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.csg-l
Date:         Mon, 21 Dec 1992 22:39:36 -0600
Comments:     Warning -- original Sender: tag was cziko@UX1.CSO.UIUC.EDU
From:         "Gary A. Cziko" <g-cziko@UIUC.EDU>
Subject:      Prediction as Feedforward

[from Gary Cziko 921222.0430 GMT]

Dennis Delprato and Bill Powers:

I suppose here's another misunderstanding concerning control systems that
we might want to add to our library.

In discussion the application of control system models to understanding
"motor control" with a physiological psychologist, he was arguing that the
ability to predict meant that feedforward was taking place.  The example he
used was predicting the movement that an object would take and using that
knowledge for tracking (like how it's easier to point to a the end of a
swinging pendulum than to a fly caught in the shower stall with you).

I don't think I did a very good job at trying to explain how tracking
patterns can be seen as controlling a higher-level perceptual variable.
Perhaps someone can help could help me out with this.  It is also related,
I believe, to the discussion between Taylor and Powers concerning what a
control systems has to be able to "predict" in order to maintain good
control.--Gary
------------------------------------------------------------------
Gary A. Cziko                    Telephone: 217.333.8527
Educational Psychology           FAX: 217.244.7620
University of Illinois           E-mail: g-cziko@uiuc.edu
1310 S. Sixth Street             Radio: N9MJZ
210 Education Building
Champaign, Illinois 61820-6990
USA
------------------------------------------------------------------
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11]
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.csg-l
Date:         Sat, 26 Dec 1992 18:08:59 EST
From:         Eileen Prince <eprince@LYNX.DAC.NORTHEASTERN.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Eileen, Theory

To Dag and all:

Thanks for the encouragement.

I have read about a third of the book and hope to finish it this
vacation.  So far it makes sense and I am both enjoying it and trying to
learn from it.  I have had no trouble
with the idea that we have control over our perceptions of others nor
with the idea of dare I call it archetypes (though not necessarily
Jungian in the sense of being the same for all people -- I think that
was part of his theory) that are a kind of baggage that may govern our
perceptions if we don't see beyond them.  I have to a great extent
"believed" these ideas since long before my exposure to PCT.  That's
part of what appeals to me so much about the theory.

Here's a thought if someone really wants to proselytize.  How about an
article for a magazine like COSMOPOLITAN, something with a header like:
"If You Think He's Prince Charming, It May All Be in Your Head:  How PCT
Can Help in Evaluating Relationships."  I say this not at all
tongue-in-cheek.  I strongly believe in popularizing theories within pop
culture.  Then they may be taken more seriously be "scientists."

Are there any takers?  If not, I just may write the article myself,
though I won't have time until the second half of the new year because
of my ESL text writing schedule, etc.

Hope you really want my contributions on the list, because now I fear
I've just gotten started.

Here's to a fruitful new year, and thanks to all.

Eileen
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Posted-Date: Thu, 31 Dec 92 14:02:41 PST
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.csg-l
Date:         Thu, 31 Dec 1992 14:02:41 PST
From:         marken@AERO.ORG
Subject:      Bad day at the library

[From Rick Marken (921231.1400)]

Tom Bourbon  (921228  9:23) --

>If  you want to get an idea of what behavioral ald life science
>are like without the realization that living things are in a high-gain
>negative feedback interaction with their environment, try these two
>recent collections:

>   American Psychologist, Vol. 47, No. 11, November 1992.

>22 articles, an introduction, and a historical note make this a rich
>source for anyone who needs up-to-the-minute evidence that radical
>behaviorists say the things we (would-be PCT authors) attribute to them

Forget the radical  -- this is conservative, conventional, state of
the art psychology talking here. I looked it over briefly; very few
references to PCT, indeed. I guess they figure they can do just fine
without us.

Interestingly, the author of one of the articles is Charles Catania, with
whom I've started an off-line conversation about purpose in behavior. I
sent him my little quote on the importance of determining purpose in
order to know what an organism is doing (as an alternative to the Skinner
quote I posted a couple days ago). He was interested in how one might
determine an animal's purpose; I referred him to my "Behavior in the
first degree" paper. He suggested that our discussion might move into
PSYCHOLOQUY -- now where have I heard that name before?

>  All in all, these two thick collections gave me a renewed appreciation
>of the degree to which the idea of high-gain negative feedback control
>has penetrated the behavioral and life sciences -- not one bit.

Beautifully said; I nearly fell off my chair laughing when I read it.
I think your estimate is accurate to the forth decimal place.

Love and joy

Rick

 **************************************************************

Richard S. Marken                   USMail: 10459 Holman Ave
The Aerospace Corporation                   Los Angeles, CA 90024
E-mail: marken@aero.org
(310) 336-6215 (day)
(310) 474-0313 (evening)
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Phone: +1 602 963 6474
Content-Type: text
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.csg-l
Date:         Tue, 22 Dec 1992 08:37:32 GMT
From:         rljackson@ATTMAIL.COM
Subject:      Truth from error?

[from Ray Jackson (921222.0145)]

   Gary Cziko, Bruce Nevin and others (various times)


>>      Melius invenitur veritas ex errore quam ex ignorantia
>>"It is easier to arrive at truth from error than from ignorance."


> ....make a revision?  I would much prefer something like "get closer
>to" or "draw nearer to" than "arrive at."  Would something like
>"advenitur" do it?  This reflects my Popperian sympathies.--Gary

What about the quote by Francis Bacon (in English): "Truth emerges more
readily from error than from confusion."

Regards,
Ray


********************************************************************
Ray L. Jackson
3613 W. Saragosa St.
Chandler, AZ 85226
rljackson@attmail.com
********************************************************************
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: csg-l@uiucvmd.BITNET
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.csg-l
Date:         Sun, 27 Dec 1992 12:57:35 -0700
From:         Ed Ford <ATEDF@ASUACAD.BITNET>
Subject:      good news

from Ed Ford (921227:1300)

To CSGnetters who've expressed an interest in my TV show for their
area, here are the other stations (not mentioned in my 921224
letter) who've expressed an interest in using my show.  SOCA (S.
Carolina); GEOR (Georgia); KENT (Kent, O); CONN (Conneticut); OREG
(Oregon); ALAB (Alabama); IDAH (Idaho); ARKA (Arkansas); WNED
(Buffalo, NY); KCPT (Kansas City, Mo.); WHRO (Norfolk, VA); NDAK
(N. Dakota); WXXI (Rochester, NY); WCVE (Richmond, VA); KUAT
(Tucson, AZ); WMEA (Portland, ME); KUSH (Bozeman, Montana); KTWU
(Topeka, KS); WVPT (Harrisenberg, VA); (KEET Eureka, CA); and WNMU
(Marquette, MI).

Usually, most spring promotions are done in March.  Best to call
your local station and ask for the program manager.  You might
mention the show's name (Love Guaranteed With Ed Ford) and the
station that produced the show (KAET-TV, Phoenix).  Again, these
stations expressed an interest in using the show, it doesn't mean
they will definitely use it.  Those interested in viewing a
commercial copy of the show, it is available from Brandt Publishing
(my address below) to CSGnetters for $10 (half price) plus $2
shipping.

Ed Ford ATEDF@ASUVM.INRE.ASU.EDU
10209 N. 56th St., Scottsdale, Arizona 85253  Ph.602 991-4860
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.csg-l
Date:         Wed, 30 Dec 1992 16:47:34 EST
From:         mmt@BEN.DCIEM.DND.CA
Subject:      Re: Apologies

[Martin Taylor 921230 16:30]
(Bruce Nevin 921230 10:53 and Bill Powers 921229.2100) in response to
(Tom Bourbon 921228.1550 CST)

Both Bruce and Bill, from different viewpoints, argue that you should be
able to say the same things publicly or privately.  As the one to whom
Tom was mainly apologizing, I don't think I agree.  Bruce's argument was
essentially that one should be circumspect in both cases, and not say
anything privately that one would not wish to be made public (and that
it displayed trust to do otherwise--an independent point).  Bill's point
is:
> A friend is someone
>you can call a stupid sunuvabitch without fearing that it's
>goodbye forever. Say what you think; we're all grown up around
>here.

Bill has said that before, on similar occasions.  The problem arises not
with the friends, but with the lurkers who may not realize that these
things are said among friends, or if the insult is simed at someone who
may not be sure that the insulter thinks of the insultee as a friend.
To my friends and those whom I trust, I can be very insulting because I
know that they will take it in the proper context.  But I don't normally
do it in public, because one of the aspects of social interaction is the
perception that third parties have of one's relationships.  Courtesy is
important, except in private, and then only if the discourtesy is taken
properly.

Now I admit to being at fault, not following my own prescription on several
occasions.  Like Bruce, I sometimes forget that we are not a closed
community.  When I teased Rick with a comment I won't repeat because he
did find it insulting, I was thinking within a closed community consisting
of Rick, Bill P., Tom, Bruce, and one or two others, forgetting that there
are over 100 other people, some of whom may not know the depth of Rick's
understanding of PCT.  I said the sort of thing I would have said to Rick
face to face over a beer.  That is not appropriate on a public mailing list.

Tom's comment likewise was intended to be private.  (I would have preferred
it to be Cc-ed to me--I like to know what people think of me, even if it
isn't complimentary).  I answered him privately, and, I hope adequately
and not insultingly.  I do not think Tom's comment should have been public,
and he didn't intend it so.  Within the small closed community, I would
have no problem with it being public.  As Bill said, "We're all grown up
around here."  But there are listeners who might be tempted to chime in,
and the very last thing we want on CSG-L is a flame war like those that
occur on so many mailing lists and Usenet groups.

Martin
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11]
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.csg-l
Date:         Fri, 25 Dec 1992 17:56:27 EST
From:         Eileen Prince <eprince@LYNX.DAC.NORTHEASTERN.EDU>
Subject:      ALTERING ONE'S THEORETICAL VIEW OF HUMAN BEHAVIOR

I think one alters one's theoretical view by finding a(nother) theory
that fits the data better than the one previously held or better than
the atheoretical view that one has been taking.  Naturally, a knowledge
of a theory that works will probably speed up this process.  Naturally I
speak of the open-minded.

Just call me a die-hard empiricist, but not one that is atheoretical.

HAPPY CHRISTMAS TO ALL AND TO ALL A GOOD NIGHT.

Eileen Prince/Northeastern University
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"CSG-L@UIUCVMD.BITNET"
Original_cc:  TBOURBON
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.csg-l
Date:         Mon, 28 Dec 1992 09:46:00 CDT
From:         Tom Bourbon <TBOURBON@UTMBEACH.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Eileen, Theory

From Tom Bourbon  (921228  9:23)
Eileen Prince  (921226)
  It looks to me as though you are EXACTLY the person to do that article
for COSMO.  That would move COSMOPOLITAN way up on my list, over some
of the things I read and skimmed during the extended weekend for the
holidays.  If  you want to get an idea of what behavioral ald life science
are like without the realization that living things are in a high-gain
negative feedback interaction with their environment, try these two
recent collections:

   American Psychologist, Vol. 47, No. 11, November 1992.  The entire issue os d
devoted to the topic, "Reflections on B. F. Skinner and Psychology."  The
22 articles, an introduction, and a historical note make this a rich source for
anyone who needs up-to-the-minute evidence that radical behaviorists say
the things we (would-be PCT authors) attribute to them -- reviewers like
to tell us our attributions are incorrect.  (By the way, one of the denizens
of CSG-L is co-author of one of the articles, and a nice one it is!
Dennis J. Delprato & Bryan D. Midgley, Some fundamentals of B. F. Skinner's
behaviorism," pp. 1507-1520.  This is a nice review exactly what they say
it is -- many of the fundamentals.)

  Behavioral and Brain Sciences, Vol. 15, No. 4, December 1992.  An issue
on "Controversies in neuroscience I: Movement control.  Gary Cziko
mentioned tghis one a few days back, but I just had to see for myself.  Not
one mention of PCT or anything close -- well, there are a few commentaries
that come a little close, but not very.  And the first of eight target
articles is by Bizzi, Hogan, Mussa-Ivaldi, and Goszter:  "Does the nervous
system use equilibrium-point control to guide single and multiple jointt
movements?"  Bill and Greg -- when you re-submit your manuscript on
ARM-LITTLE MAN, I am certain this reference, and its long list of
commentaries in B&BS, will be thrown back at you.  Better look at it and
mention it.

  All in all, these two thick collections gave me a renewed appreciation
of the degree to which the idea of high-gain negative feedback control
has penetrated the behavioral and life sciences -- not one bit.
  A few days ago, I posted, "May Boss Reality tread lightly on the controlled
variables of you, and of those you love."  I didn't expect to find my own
CVs stomped flat!
       (Bizzi's coauthor is Giszter, not Goszter.)
Until later,
   A two-dimensional Tom Bourbon
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.csg-l
Date:         Tue, 22 Dec 1992 03:14:00 GMT
From:         Hortideas Publishing <0004972767@MCIMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Steps and such

From Greg Williams (921221 - 2)

>Bill Powers (921221.1500)

>The PCT model is fundamentally a generative model. As such it is
>only partly successful. It will become more successful as we
>become able to simulate more and more complex behaviors, thus
>showing that the structure of the model is plausible.

This is the direction in which I was trying to point when I asked earlier
today about modeling step tracking performance. Given good prediction of
tracking with low error over most of the duration of a trial, I think the
logical next step is to attempt prediction when error is higher over most of
the duration of a trial. Also, because good control obscures system
parameters, I think higher error situations will make it easier to distinguish
among candidate models with regard to their predictive abilities, and to
identify nonlinearities in system components.

>By using a little control
>system, the program adjusts the difficulty of a task (by varying
>the speed with which a table of disturbance values is scanned)
>until a specific amount of RMS tracking error is produced by the
>participant. This amount of error is then maintained quite well
>in a subsequent one-minute tracking task. The purpose is to
>measure parameters of control at standard levels of tracking
>error, and also to monitor long-term changes in tracking skill.

Sounds great -- in some ways better than steps/ramps, but I suspect figuring
out which types of nonlinearities to try in the models might be easier with
steps/ramps. Also, be sure to look at a broad range of disturbance bandwidths,
to make sure the "good" models aren't biased for a notch which you are
gradually moving up the spectrum. I'll be interested to see your results.
What's the timetable?

>>Should be easy for somebody who can predict for One whole
>>minute, right?

>Yeah. When are you going to do it?

I don't need to, since you already are.

As ever,

Greg
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11]
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.csg-l
Date:         Sun, 27 Dec 1992 06:43:03 EST
From:         Eileen Prince <eprince@LYNX.DAC.NORTHEASTERN.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Misc. blah

Bill's recent posting on defending theories reminded me of an incident
that took place when I was a doctoral level grad student at Harvard (in
linguistics, still ABD).  My area of specialization was/is discourse
analysis, and I had written a paper, I believe on article use, though
I'm not positive at this time (how soon we forget when removed from the
context!).  In the paper, I had made the claim that my theory accounted
for most of the data but that there were certain data which it did not
adequately describe.  I then gave examples of that data.  My adviser,
who I still respect in many ways, chuckled.  He told me to take out that
part and to never admit in a paper or publication that a theory of mine
did not work completely.  He said that if I felt compelled I could
mention the deviant (recalcitrant?) data in a footnote, but that even
that was not necessary.  He said to wait till others pointed out what
the theory did not account for and then to respond.

This was "only" linguistics, love it though I do.  If this type of stuff
goes on in the hard sciences, ....  Speaking of which, I think that
Richard Feynman tried to debunk the system, but he of course had already
made his reputation.  Remember the rings on the rocket or something like
that?

Best again,


Eileen
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU