🚀 go-pugleaf

[From Rick Marken (990421.1240)]

Bruce Gregory (990421.1430 EDT)--

> I'm not sure how a question can be a non-sequitur.

By not following logically from the statement to which it
is a reply.

Me:

> The control engineer who rejected my paper on controlled
> variables did so for the following three reasons: 1) control
> systems are more properly viewed as controlling objective
> states of affairs, not perceptions

Ye:

> Perfectly understandable.

Understandable, perhaps. But wrong, in fact. Doesn't that matter?

Me:

> 2) the presentation of control theory was way too elementary

Ye:

> Definitely true from an engineer's perspective. All of PCT deals
> with a section of the first chapter of any text on control.

Really? The first chapter of any text on control deals with the
nature of control, controlled perceptual variables, the behavioral
illusion, testing for controlled variables, etc? If all PCT
deals with is what is dealt with in any text on control then
why are you so excited about PCT? Why do you want to imagine
that you are one of "us"?

Me:

> 3) psychologists already know all about controlled variables
>  anyway.

Ye:

> Why would you expect an engineer to know anything about what
> psychologists know or don't know?

Because he is a psychologist too, studying how people catch
fly balls.

Me:

> Would say that this fellow  understands control theory perfectly
> well because it "works for him".

Ye:

> Yes.

Really?.

> Isn't it possible that there might be a fundamental flaw in
> this person's understanding of control theory, even though it
> "works for him"?

Ye:

> Yes.

Clearly there is at least one fundamental flaw in his understanding
of control theory: he thinks control systems control objective
states of affairs, not perceptions. This flaw in his understanding
made it impossible for him to understand the two main points of
my paper: 1) controlled variables are perceptual variables and
2) in order to understand the observed behavior of a control
system it is necessary to test to determine what perceptual
variable(s) it is controlling. So he, a control theorist, rejected
my paper out of ignorance of control theory.

Now, do you still think this fellow understands control theory
perfectly well?

Best

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