00100	EVALUATION 
00200	
00300		The primary aim in constructing this model  was  to  explore,
00400	clarify, develop, test and improve -all with a model- a theory having
00500	explanatory value. To satisfy this aim, the model must meet norms  of
00600	internal    consistency   (systemicity)   and   norms   of   external
00700	correspondence with observation (testability). A secondary aim  would
00800	involve pragmatic norms of application.  These aims are not unrelated
00900	but the primary one is more  fundamental  since  useful  applications
01000	require some degree of consistency and correspondence to observation.
01100		As emphasized in Chapter  2,  a  model  in  the  form  of  an
01200	algorithm  consists  of  a structure of functions or procedures whose
01300	inner workings are  sufficient  to  reproduce  the  outward  symbolic
01400	behavior  under  consideration.   The theory embodied in the model is
01500	revealed  in  the  set of statements which illuminate the connections
01600	betweeen input and output, i.e.  which  describe  how  the  structure
01700	reacts under various circumstances.
01800		What constitutes a satisfactory explanation has been  treated
01900	in  Chapter  2. The "fit" or correspondence with facts of observation
02000	as indicated by  measurements  and  empirical  tests  indicating  the
02100	degree of faithfulness of the reproduction, were described in Chapter
02200	6. Given that the model has met the above criteria, what does  it  as
02300	an artifact tell us about naturally-occurring paranoid processes?
02400		First, the model attempts to revisualize  or  reconceptualize
02500	the  phenomena  of  paranoid disorders. It draws attention to factors
02600	(such as the scan for malevolence as protection against  humiliation)
02700	which  might  not otherwise be attended to and which have therapeutic
02800	implications.  Paranoid  disorders  are  not  viewed  as  first-order
02900	"diseases" but as a mode of processing symbols secondary to a primary
03000	disturbance.    The patterns of linguistic paranoid behavior observed
03100	in  an interview are produced by an underlying organized structure of
03200	rules and not by a  variety  of  random  and  unconnected  mechanical
03300	failures.   Second, the underlying structure is posited to consist of
03400	an algorithm, an  organization  of  symbol-processing  strategies  or
03500	procedures.   Third, the model as an analogy indicates that to change
03600	this structure, its procedures must be accessible to reprogramming in
03700	the higher-level language of the algorithm. Finally, in the interests
03800	of a general conceptual reform, the model suggests that  other  types
03900	of   psychopathologies  might  be  viewed  from  a  symbol-processing
04000	standpoint.
04100		Decision  procedures  for  consensus acceptability of a model
04200	sometimes depend not so much  on  truth,  an  elusive  state,  as  on
04300	whether  a  majority  of  the  relevant expert community believes the
04400	theory or model to approximate truth to some unknown  and  unknowable
04500	degree  and  to be better than promising available alternatives, that
04600	is, to be the best we can do for the time being.  A model is  tenable
04700	as  long  as  it is worth working with by improving it, extending it,
04800	devising experiments and tests  to  probe  it,  and  applying  it  in
04900	contexts  of  practical  action.  Validation  is ultimately a private
05000	experience of the individual. Empirical truth or  falsity  cannot  be
05100	proven with certainty, but their presence can be assayed by some sort
05200	of critical assessment and deliberation.  We can forgive  models  for
05300	being  only  nearly  true.   A theory or model may bring cognitive or
05400	pragmatic comfort, not because  it  is  TRUE  but  because  it  is  a
05500	workable  and  exciting  possibility  which represents an improvement
05600	over its contending rivals.
05700		Cognitive comfort is a  type  of  intellectual  satisfaction.
05800	Pragmatic comfort accrues from technically exploitable knowledge,i.e.
05900	applications which make things work the way humans want them to  work
06000	efficiently  in  practical  contexts of technological action. For the
06100	pragmatist, a model is a means to an end; for  the  theoretician,  an
06200	explanatory model is an end in itself. It is hoped that this paranoid
06300	model can contribute to understanding one of the mysteries  of  human
06400	conduct,  the paranoid mode. There remains the enigma of the paranoid
06500	"streak" which  renders  whole  nations  susceptible  to  ideological
06600	convictions  in  which  Elsewhereans  are  believed  to be malevolent
06700	oppressors.
06800		It  is  a  truism  of  methodology textbooks that an infinite
06900	number of theories or  models  can  account  for  the  same  data  of
07000	observation.        Without   questioning  whether  "infinite"  means
07100	indefinitely large or just more than one, we  must  allow  for  rival
07200	explanations.  For a rival to be a live and tenable option, it should
07300	be truly alternative (i.e., not just a family version saying the same
07400	thing  in  a  different way), and be confirmable or disconfirmable by
07500	tests.
07600		Prediction of new facts from a theory not only test a  theory
07700	but  provide  useful information. Not all acceptable theories predict
07800	new facts, e.g. Copernicus'. Although I would maintain that  faithful
07900	reproduction  (fidelity  as  measured  by  indistinguishability along
08000	specific dimensions) is a proper and major test for the  adequacy  of
08100	simulation models, it would be a bonus if our model could satisfy the
08200	function of making possible new knowledge through prediction.     The
08300	term  "prediction"  has a spectrum of meanings ranging from forecasts
08400	to prognoses to prophecies to precise point-predictions in time.   To
08500	predict  (and  to  postdict)  from a theory or model is to derive and
08600	announce  a  fact  prior  to  knowledge  of  its  actual  occurrence.
08700	However  one  needs  knowledge  of  the  kind  of  fact expected, the
08800	conditions which produce it and the circumstances under which it will
08900	occur.  The  interest  in  prediction  may  stem from a desire (1) to
09000	confirm or disconfirm a theory or  model  or  (2)  to  obtain  useful
09100	information  about  the future, as in weather forecasting.  Celestial
09200	mechanics provides the  ideal  of  accurate  long-range  predictions.
09300	But  even  astronomers,  with  the advantage of studying isolated and
09400	repetitive systems, have their troubles.    In  1759  Halley's  comet
09500	arrived  four  days later than predicted.    In spite of our advanced
09600	20th century knowledge, a prediction made in 1962 was  off  by  eight
09700	days, that is, twice as bad. (In fairness we must make allowances for
09800	the fact that great masses, distances and  velocities  are  involved.
09900	Also comets defy Newton's law of gravity).
10000		Predictions of individual human behavior are severely limited
10100	by  our  restrictions  of  knowledge.    For  example, (1) sufficient
10200	knowledge of initial conditions may require that we  know  the  whole
10300	past  history of an individual (something not yet achieved for even a
10400	single person), (2) individuals do not remain isolated over the  time
10500	stretch of the prediction; they interact with other individuals of an
10600	unknown nature, (3)  since  life  is  a  fortuitous  flux  of  chance
10700	intersections of independent causal chains, one would also have to be
10800	able to foresee events of the physical environment and  its  changes,
10900	(4)  the  process  of  observation  needed  to obtain information for
11000	predictions may have non-negligible and unforeseeable effects on  the
11100	observed.
11200		In  one  sense  our  paranoid  model  makes  moment-to-moment
11300	predictions and asserts  new  counterfactuals  about  behavior  in  a
11400	psychiatric  interview.  That  is,  if  an  interviewer  says X under
11500	conditions Y, then the model's  response  will  be  characterized  by
11600	z1...zn,   and   the   same   holds   true   for  paranoid  patients.
11700	Counterfactual  prediction  means  that  on  the  basis  of  observed
11800	behavior  we  are willing, with  an  inductive  risk,  to  assume the
11900	presence of unobserved behavior potentials in a model's or  patient's
12000	repertoire of capabilities.
12100		Predicting  new  kinds  of  events  or properties, instead of
12200	kinds we are already familiar with, would represent a genuine  bonus,
12300	indicating  the  model is more than ad hoc and has excess content. It
12400	would give both clinicians and investigators something to  look  for.
12500	This  novelty  could  arise  in  two  ways.    First, the model might
12600	demonstrate a property  of  the  paranoid  mode  hitherto  unobserved
12700	clinically.      In  principle  this could come about because the I-O
12800	behavior of  the  model  is  a  consequence  of  a  large  number  of
12900	interacting  hypotheses  and  assumptions chosen initially to explain
13000	frequently observed phenomena.    When the elements of such a complex
13100	conjunction  interact  with  highly  variable  inputs  they  generate
13200	consequences in addition to those  they  were  designed  to  explain.
13300	Whether  any  of these consequences are significant or characteristic
13400	of the paranoid mode remains a subject for future study.
13500		It  is  also  possible that a new property of paranoia may be
13600	discovered in the clinical  interview,  although  perhaps  everything
13700	that  can  be  said about paranoid dialogues has been said.  If a new
13800	property were found, a search  for  it  might  be  conducted  in  the
13900	model's  behavior. If successful, this again would add to the model's
14000	acceptability.
14100		A second novelty might arise in the behavior of the model  in
14200	some  new situation.   Since it is designed to simulate communicative
14300	behavior in an interview situation, the "new" circumstance would have
14400	to involve some new type of linguistic interaction to which the model
14500	is capable of responding. From its behavior one  might  then  predict
14600	how paranoid patients would behave under similar circumstances.   The
14700	requisite empirical tests and  measures  would  show  the  degree  of
14800	correspondence between patient and model behaviors.
14900		This possibility is of importance in considering emancipatory
15000	therapies for patients  entangled  in  the quandaries of the paranoid
15100	mode.    Since the model operates at a symbol processing level  using
15200	natural  language,  it  is      this  level  at  which linguistic and
15300	conceptual skills of clinicians can be  applied.   Language-based  or
15400	semantic  techniques  do not seem very effective in the psychoses but
15500	they are useful in states of lesser severity. A  wide  range  of  new
15600	semantic  techniques, including extremes, could be tried first on the
15700	model without subjecting patients to blind experimentation.
15800		While we have used the model principally to explore a  theory
15900	and  to study psychiatric judgements, its potential use as a training
16000	device has  not  escaped  our  reflections.    Medical  students  and
16100	psychiatric  residents  need  "disposable  patients"  to  practice on
16200	without jeopardy (to either). A version of  the  paranoid  model  can
16300	display  the  changes  in  its  inner  states  during  an  interview.
16400	Whether  the  optimal  goal  of  interviewing   (gathering   relevant
16500	information  without  upsetting  the patient)  has been achieved, can
16600	thus be estimated.     A  beginning  interviewer  could  practice  in
16700	private or with a supervisor present. Many interviewers have reported
16800	that the model has a definite effect on them.    The student can  get
16900	the  feel  of  the  paranoid mode long before he interviews an actual
17000	patient.     The effect  of  various  interviewing  styles  might  be
17100	studied and compared.
17200	
17300		Although this simulation of  paranoia  covers  a  variety  of
17400	phenomena,  it  is  circumscribed in what it attempts to explain. The
17500	proffered explanation is local and restricted in that it accounts for
17600	only  one  type  of  symbol-processing mode.  Past attempts at grand-
17700	scale explanations of all  mental  processes  in  all  contexts  have
17800	failed.   A  preferable strategy, successful in other sciences, is to
17900	build one circumscribed and tested theory or model at a time so  that
18000	the  field  can  gradually  move  forward a step at a time, each step
18100	gaining consensus before attempting the next.