home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
- Path: sparky!uunet!paladin.american.edu!auvm!MCIMAIL.COM!0004742580
- Message-ID: <54930103091945/0004742580NA3EM@mcimail.com>
- Newsgroups: bit.listserv.csg-l
- Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1993 09:19:00 GMT
- Sender: "Control Systems Group Network (CSGnet)" <CSG-L@UIUCVMD.BITNET>
- From: Dag Forssell <0004742580@MCIMAIL.COM>
- Subject: Dag's Misc.
- Lines: 382
-
- Re: Apology, Be nice to Ed, Scientific revolutions, Gary, Dick.
-
- [From Dag Forssell (930103 01.10)] Bruce Nevin Dec 30:
-
- >Despite the cost of giving up gossip, it does seem better to try to make
- >one's private face and public face more congruent to each other, not by
- >restricting private communications to a public standard, but by seeking
- >honorable and healing ways of being forthright in the same ways in both
- >spheres. Needless to say, that's a goal, not an achievement--I'm not
- >adept at controlling that perception!
-
- I would like to weigh in in Bruce's congruent corner in what I hope will
- be a PCT kind of way, by attempting to define a way to be forthright.
-
- In my two page paper: "Control: what it is; where it applies" I wrote:
-
- The highest expression of respect I can imagine is to
- encourage and actively support your family, associates,
- employees, vendors, customers and friends in the exercise of
- well-informed, effective and satisfying individual control.
-
- I believe this is what the discourse on this net is all about. Private
- posts too.
-
- ----------------------------------------------------------------
- In my presentations, I use this chart. For the environment, I now use
- CAPS, inspired by our discussions of REALITY. For the brain, I use lower
- case, since it is all perception (reality).
-
- A PERSON. _______________
- | Understanding |
- | v |
- | Major *want* |
- | v |
- | Minor *want* |
- |_______________|
- |
- ______v_____
- | |
- o-->| Compare |---o
- | |____________| |
- ______|_____ _____v_____
- | | | |
- | Perception | |Instruction| Brain
- ============|____________|========|___________|=================
- ^ / ENVIRONMENT
- ___|___ _____v__ ________
- | | | | | OTHER |
- | ACTUAL|<--| ACTION |-->| EFFECTS|
- |_______| |________| |________|
- ^
- _____|___________________________
- | |
- | DISTURBANCE |
- |_________________________________|
-
- With this I define EFFECTIVENESS. (What Ed would call responsibility).
- --------------------------------------------------------------------
- WHAT IS AN EFFECTIVE PERSON?
-
- WANT:
- An effective person develops a good mental map of the world.
- An effective person develops a reasoned, legitimate set of wants.
- An effective person balances control between self and others.
-
- PERCEPTION:
- An effective person perceives data accurately and chooses perceptions
- with great care.
-
- COMPARISON:
- An effective person is attentive and sensitive to differences between
- perceptions and corresponding wants.
-
- INSTRUCTIONS:
- An effective person chooses from a range of options to select one most
- appropriate for the situation.
-
- ACTION:
- An effective person uses resources to function with adequate effort.
-
- ACTUAL:
- An effective person directs the action so that it has a strong effect on
- the actual variable selected for attention.
-
- DISTURBANCE:
- An effective person recognizes or anticipates disturbances and adjusts
- minor wants as required in time to withstand the effect without loss of
- control.
-
- OTHER CONSEQUENCES:
- An effective person is aware of side effects and considers their
- influence on self and others.
- -------------------------------------------------------------------
-
- Now for some musings on respect:
- -----------------------
- RESPECT
-
- UNDERSTANDING:
- Clearly recognize that all beings are autonomous living control systems.
-
- GOLDEN RULE:
- Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.
-
- DIAMOND RULE:
- Treat others the way they want to be treated.
- (One cannot assume that everyone has uniform goals - the same as yours).
-
- RECOGNIZE THE OTHER INDIVIDUAL:
- Demonstrate genuine interest in the other person's world.
- Ask permission to enter into the other person's world.
- Give permission for the other person to enter into your world.
- Listen well... paraphrase.
- Covey: "Seek first to understand ...then to be understood."
-
- SUPPORT THE OTHER INDIVIDUAL:
- - Support the control system!
- - Offer information.
- - Question wants.
- - Help resolve want conflicts.
- - Question perceptions.
- - Recognize disturbances as such.
- - Help plan more effective control.
-
- REQUIREMENT:
- - Work in the other person's head.
-
- GET INVOLVED! INFLUENCE! (NO MANIPULATION).
- ------------------------------------------------------------------
-
- RESPECT
-
- A profound respect for other people is suggested:
-
- 1) You cannot impose wants or goals on another individual.
-
- 2) You can offer information to an individual,
- which the individual can incorporate if:
- - it connects to what the individual already understands
- - it does not conflict with the individual's own
- preexisting understanding (paradigm).
-
- 3) The individual will change his/her understanding and wants,
- and add to his/her capability to perceive, select and act.
-
- 4) Allow individuals to perform. This brings satisfaction, quality
- and productivity.
-
- 5) Never impose your subjective judgement on that individual (pt 1).
-
- 6) Do encourage individuals who cannot or choose not to accept your
- information to find other environments where they can accept the
- information offered. This includes termination for non-alignment
- and non-performance.
-
- 7) Encourage communication about Wants, Perceptions, Comparisons,
- Instructions and Action among all; within and between departments.
- -------------------------------------------------------------------
- LACK OF RESPECT
-
- Ways to prevent a living control system from functioning:
-
- UNDERSTANDING NOT ALIGNED WITH REALITY:
- Bad information provided to a person will lead to a bad selection of
- wants, poor perception and poor instructions for action.
-
- POORLY DEFINED WANTS:
- Unrealistic or extreme wants chosen by a person leave no margin for
- action to keep actual variable in control. Control system crashes.
-
- PERCEPTION CAPABILITY LIMITED OR DISTORTED:
- Lack of attention, instrumentation, understanding - all cause an
- incomplete or faulty perception of what is going on and lead to
- distorted comparisons.
-
- ACTUAL DOES NOT RESPOND CORRECTLY TO ACTIONS:
- Interference, such as a concerned parent stepping in to protect a
- child from the effects of actions, gives the child false information
- about the world. This defeats the child the next time, when the parent
- is not there to protect it. Thus, by protecting the child, the parent
- defeats the child's development as a control system.
-
- REQUIRE CERTAIN BEHAVIORS:
- Pressure your employees to work 'til 9 PM to demonstrate devotion
- instead of asking for results.
-
- USE REWARDS AND PUNISHMENTS:
- This only creates want conflicts. By their nature, rewards and
- punishments are disturbances interfering with control.
-
- ESTABLISH "HEALTHY" COMPETITION:
- Competition, whether among vendors or employees prevents the
- development of mutual respect.
- -------------------------------------------------------------
- RESPECT
-
- Things to avoid:
-
- 1. Don't criticize.
- Your opinion defeats the process of working in the person's head.
-
- 2. Don't tell the person what's "wrong" with him or her. See 1.
-
- 3. Don't let the person criticize himself or herself.
- It does not support the development of control.
-
- 4. Avoid any discussion of "feelings." They are secondary.
-
- 5. Don't take over the person's responsibilities -- or delegate them
- to someone else. That does not allow the person to function.
-
- 6. Don't ask the person why he or she is behaving in a certain way.
- Behavior is an almost incidental effect of your want and perception.
-
- 7. Don't bring up a negative incident from the past.
- It is beyond the person's control at this point.
-
- 8. Don't challenge or comment on statements about disturbances.
- Help the person deal with them when a plan is negotiated.
-
- 9. Don't accept comments about the environment.
- Put them in perspective if they are important to the person.
- ------------------------------------------------------------------
- These charts have much of Ed Ford's work as their origin or inspiration.
- ------------------------------------------------------------------
-
- If your purpose is to learn PCT and support others who also learn PCT,
- I do not believe there will be any difficulty in writing posts which can
- be published 100%, even when reorganizing conflict is involved:
-
- Gary Cziko 930103.0240 GMT
- >Rick.. ..While I have your attention and admiration, why don't you be
- >nicer to Ed Ford?
-
- Gary, you've got it all wrong. Rick IS nice to Ed Greenberg. And Ed to
- Rick L. Canon. You should listen in on their amicable private
- conversations. (Ed told me a few months ago on the phone: "This is what
- the net is for)." Both Ed and Rick have the purpose of studying PCT and
- understanding life. Each has some funny systems concepts that any
- enlightened bystander like you or I obviously could improve on and
- therefore each (obviously to the other) needs to reorganize some. Each
- understands that disturbances and error signals are part of that
- process/progress. Both are ready, willing and able to do their best to
- create a reorganizing error signal in the other in their efforts to teach
- each other (infinitely variable!) standards and responsibility, not to
- mention systems concepts based on fact / all perception. Gary, it takes
- a fully evolved person like yourself to appear to be nice and manage to
- get published by those you try to reorganize with mortal body blows. Rick
- needs another 10,000 years "(recorded human history)", which I am sure
- Ed is willing to give him. Ed will get the last laugh.
-
- It is interesting how you almost welcome the discomfort of reorganization
- when you understand PCT and can anticipate and look for greater
- effectiveness at the end of that tunnel. Between me and Christine, those
- inflicted error signals are out in the open, too. So we discuss Wants and
- Perceptions and reorganize.
-
- Gary, while I have your attention, PLEASE give me the phone number of
- Educational Researcher. I thank you for copy of your paper, but I really
- want to buy the real thing where everything is in context (and crisp).
-
- Nice demo. Thanks for description. Who is Arlo Guthrie?
-
- About demos. An analogy:
-
- Those systems concepts can be likened to a pile of pick-up-sticks. The
- ones near the bottom of the pile are based on simple snippets of
- information (principles). Others higher in the pile are based on more
- principles and on underlying (pre-existing) systems concepts. As a loving
- teacher, you can offer information which challenges and suggests changes
- in recent (on top) systems concepts. But challenge the ones near the
- bottom, which support and are intimately intertwined with all the later
- ones. - You might as well kill the person. These systems concepts have
- been held so long and are so basic to the structure that they have become
- unchangeable facts. Removal would collapse the structure and set the
- person back to an early and ineffective, insecure, incomplete stage of
- development.
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
-
- Re: Scientific revolutions:
- I think it is important to inform an audience of the existence of past
- scientific revolutions to pave the way for ours. I have in mind a short
- series of slides roughly as follows: (these are too many)
-
-
- OLD SCIENCE REVOLUTIONARIES NEW SCIENCE
- (Time frame)
-
- -----------------------------
- Old paradigms fail Winning paradigm New paradigm
- to solve problems. gradually accepted,
- Competing paradigms accepted. taken for granted.
- offered from many Old experts die. Old paradigms
- (outside) people. forgotten.
- -----------------------------
-
- Earth centered Copernicus Kepler, Sun centered
- universe. Galileo, Newton universe.
- 1543 - 1687
- ------------------------------
-
- Alchemy ????? Phlogiston
- 1500 - 1600 ???? chemistry
- -------------------------------
-
- Phlogiston chemistry Priestly, Scheele Oxygen chemistry
- Lavoisier,
- 1760 - 1780
- --------------------------------
-
- Heat = matter Molecular motion heat = molecule
- called caloric paradigm motion. Gas laws,
- ???????
- ---------------------------------
-
- Aristotelian mechanics Galileo, Newton Newtonian mechanics
- 1600 - 1700
- ----------------------------------
-
- Newtonian mechanics Bohr, Einstein Relativity,
- 1900 - 1930 Quantum mechanics.
- -----------------------------------
-
- Labor = craft Taylor Formal organization.
- 1910???? Division of labor.
- -------------------------------------
-
- Formal organization. Shewhart Empower individual
- Deming Define purpose
- Juran Measure process
- 1940-2010
- -------------------------------------
-
- ????????????? Descartes Man: Cause-effect,
- God causes all? 1637- --->Behaviorism
- --->Cognition
- -------------------------------------
-
- Cause-effect Powers Perc. Control Theory
- 1957-2030
- -------------------------------------
-
- The above is written as a very rough conceptual sketch and solicitation
- of commentary, data, suggestions for sources of detailed information.
- Please let me know (on the net of course) how I can understand this
- better and present it well.
- -----------------------------------------------------------------
-
- While perusing Kuhn for specifics, I came across a statement on page 60,
- (about gases) which inspires me to state:
-
- "Contemporary psychologists' commitment to the 'scientific method' is
- simultaneously a (rarely articulated) commitment to the non-existence of
- internal purposes in an organism."
-
- --------------------------------------------------
- Dick Robertson] (930101.1600)
-
- >Ed and now Dag have succeeded in reaching the "public," and that
- >brings me to a third topic, how the public picks up new ideas.
-
- Ed has reached the public. Dag is still making progress.
-
- >...I think PCT carries implications that long run benefits accrue for
- >people who realize that we create our own experience (and our own
- >environment as a by-product) with our actions. But that theme
- >hasn't been very much developed so far. Anyone got any ideas about
- >how to demonstrate, not just claim, that?
-
- "long run benefits" like personal effectiveness, cool, calm and
- satisfaction. Dick, I really appreciate your post. I can hardly imagine
- any demonstration beyond testimonials from satisfied clients, students,
- readers etc. But that will add up with time.
- -----------------------------------------------------
-
- The discussion of animism sounds interesting. Am I alone in thinking that
- the general public is unaware of the term and what it means? (I have not
- heard it). Is anti-animism the same as saying that people are cause-
- effect machines?
- -----------------------------------------------------
-
- Best to all, Dag
-