Synopsis
A collection of papers and essays describing scientific tests of the Perceptual Control Theory (PCT) model of purposeful behavior.
"synopsis" may belong to another edition of this title.
About the Author
Dr. Marken is a Senior Behavioral Scientist at The RAND Corporation where he does research on health care and national policy issues. He is the author of two books and over 50 papers on control theory and psychology
Excerpt. © Reprinted by permission. All rights reserved.
A Science of Purpose
William James got scientific psychology off to an ex-cellent start by describing, as well as anyone before or since, the nature of purposive behavior:
Romeo wants Juliet as filings want a magnet; and if no obstacles intervene he moves toward her by as straight a line as they. But Romeo and Juliet, if a wall be built between them, do not remain idiotically pressing their faces against its oppo-site sides like the magnet and the filings with the [obstructing] card. Romeo soon finds a circuitous way, by scaling the wall or otherwise, of touching Juliet's lips directly. With the filings the path is fixed; whether it reaches the end depends on acci-dents. With the lover it is the end which is fixed, the path may be modified indefinitely. (James, 1890, p. 7)
A paragraph like this brings a tear to a control theorist's eye, not just for the beauty of the prose, but for the insight into the nature of behavior. James understood the differ-ence between purposive and non-purposive behavior and tried, unsuccessfully, to launch psychology as the science of purposive behavior. He failed because, like other vision-aries, his ideas were slightly ahead of their time.
James was trying to start a science of purpose at a time when "purpose" was a scientific profanity (it still is, to some extent, but we live in more permissive times). The tools that could make purpose scientifically respectable were not to appear for another 40 years. In the meantime, psychologists abandoned any serious efforts to understand the nature of purpose and turned, instead, to the develop-ment of theories of behavior based on a model borrowed from the physical sciences, a model designed to explain the behavior of non-purposive systems. The model assumes that natural phenomena result from the operation of cause-effect laws. Events such as behaviors result from causes, not purposes.
The cause-effect model seems appropriate as long as behavior is seen in a way that ignores its purpose. This is done by a process that can be called the "objectification" of behavior. Objective behavior is "output" that is emitted by organisms (like heat from a stove or light from a filament). From the objective point of view, behavior is something organisms do, little more than "a show put on for the bene-fit of an observer" (Powers, 1978). If the observer happens to be a behavioral scientist, he or she can determine the cause of behavior in order to "predict and control" it, just as scientists in other fields predict and control other natural phenomena. But it is clear that objective behavior serves the purposes of the observer, not those of the behaving organ-ism.
The objectification of behavior has not made purpose go away. It is difficult to avoid noticing, for example, that the results of behavior are often "good" for the organism. They seem to serve some purpose, such as providing nutrition or avoiding destruction. Thus a rat pressing a bar is producing an output (the bar press) but it is also feeding itself. The "objective" solution has been to admit that purpose exists, but to place it in the environment rather than in the organ-ism (Skinner, 1981). Thus an apparently purposive behav-ior like feeding occurs because the environment selects the appropriate outputs (bar presses), not because the organ-ism intends to eat. Purpose has come to be seen as a pas-sive result of environmental selection rather than an active attempt to produce desired results.
James was not describing purpose as a passive process. Romeo is not pulled to Juliet like filings to a magnet. Rather, he intends to place his lips on hers and he actively adjusts his actions in order to produce this end. What makes active adjustment necessary is the unpredictable nature of the environment. James saw that the environment is as likely to be a hindrance as a help in achieving desired results. Thus Romeo must adjust to the environment (a wall, a balcony, or a Capulet) in order to produce the de-sired end. In purposive behavior, as James pointed out, it is the end that is fixed while the path is modified indefinitely. These modifications are made necessary by unpredictable changes in the environment. Romeo carries out his purpose by constantly adjusting his path to achieve his end. Unfor-tunately, James could not explain how Romeo could possi-bly behave in this way, but now we can. Control theory is a model of systems that act just like Romeo, that is, systems that produce fixed results in an inconsistent and often un-helpful environment.
"About this title" may belong to another edition of this title.
Other Popular Editions of the Same Title
Search results for More Mind Readings: Methods and Models in the Study...
Stock Image
More Mind Readings: Methods and Models in the Study of Purpose
Seller: ThriftBooks-Atlanta, AUSTELL, GA, U.S.A.
Seller rating 5 out of 5 stars
Paperback. Condition: Very Good. No Jacket. May have limited writing in cover pages. Pages are unmarked. ~ ThriftBooks: Read More, Spend Less. Seller Inventory # G0944337430I4N00