nj, I assure you I take my relationship with my son very seriously; AND I let him watch TV, which I'm sure at this point can only help to stimulate neurological development.  At some point that may not be true, but there have been studies that show that infants learn lots of emotional distinctions from actors on TV, many of which would not be available to him everyday. We are in contact with a number of parent support groups, and have friends with children. That's not a problem.  My question was, who determines the outcome of the system?  I'm only using my situation because it seems like a good way to test the rule we've been discussing here.  While I have, at least explicitly, much more flexibility in learned behavior patterns, the needs of my child determine much of my behavior.  Though if I didn't have those learned behaviors neither one of us would be able to exist in the the current system.  I could influence the system by moving to a different state, introducing other foods, nailing the furniture to the ceiling, yet he is always going to cry when he's hungry, or in need of emotional support, and I am always going to respond. We both have influence, but in different ways -- you could say our variables of influence are of different logical types, if you would like, but in the end it would be impossible to weigh one set against another.  We are a system, and mutually influencing. But, in my opinion, the Law of Requisite Variety has a function other than being right.  It is a proposition which helps one decide how to attend to the variables one has at one's disposal. best, J