Re: [xmca] activity (was concepts)

[Huw Lloyd <huw.softdesigns@gmail.com>]

On 19 April 2011 17:23, Michael Glassman <MGlassman@ehe.osu.edu> wrote:

> Mike,
>
> So now you made me think (Oy) and remember Huw's original idea about
> talking about activity as experience.  But I think his later posts suggests
> he sees activity as part of a feedback mechanism.  But the definition of
> activity from Tolman's article suggests it is more about anticipation
> (perhaps a cousin of Peter's anticipation) or goal orientation - primarily
> forward looking, how to get happen what we want to happen.  I always liked
> the idea of planning as sort of a way to encapsulate what actually happen in
> (at least the first part) of the activity.  Anyway, that's how I see it all
> tying together.  Is feedback an important part of activity, or is what the
> author in the Tolman article saying is that what makes human special is that
> they can transcend feedback through their own goal planning activities
> (often to our own detriment I would guess).
>
>
The more general term regulation is probably more appropriate than
feedback.  Prediction is usually a case of feedforward, I believe, though
they both apply.  With respect to supervision, requisite variety
(particularly in the way Beer used it) is powerful and applies directly to
models, understanding etc.   I expect this may be rather low level, but if
someone asks me where my rigour is, this is where I point them.

Hope that helps,
Huw


> Michael
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu on behalf of mike cole
> Sent: Tue 4/19/2011 12:09 PM
> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> Subject: Re: [xmca] activity (was concepts)
>
>
>
> Michael-- Help me get back to the question that initiated this part of this
> rope/thread. Adding more names to the list is not working for me at all.
>
> If I am alone in this confusion, I apologize for taking up space. I am
> guessing I am not alone.
>
> mike
>
> On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 9:02 AM, Michael Glassman <MGlassman@ehe.osu.edu
> >wrote:
>
> > Phillip,
> >
> > You are right about Bateson of course.  But Von Neuman, Demming, Ashby,
> and
> > most of the others who were involved in cybernetics in the second half of
> he
> > 20th century did not.  Bateson was influenced in cybernetics but my
> > understanding was after the Macy's conferences (sorry to call it Sears,
> > department store dyslexia) he only said he was influenced by cybernetics.
> >
> > Michael
> >
> > ________________________________
> >
> __________________________________________
> _____
> xmca mailing list
> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>
>
>
> __________________________________________
> _____
> xmca mailing list
> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>
>
__________________________________________
_____
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca