Gregory Bateson, Second-Order Cybernetics, And Term Paper

" This learning process in human communication shows how, upon learning of the differences in communication acts and meanings among people of various cultures, the individual decides for himself/herself what acts and meanings that s/he should commit in specific cultures. This process of communication learning is appropriately illustrated in group communication, wherein increased diversity and conflict are present. Bateson noted, however, that communication at this level is not as easily distinguished and accomplished when compared against the first three levels of learning. Elucidating on this point, he attests that: Learning III is likely to be difficult and rare even in human beings. Expectably it will also be difficult for scientists, who are only human, to imagine or describe this process. But it is claimed that something of this sort does from time to time occur in psychotherapy, religious conversion, and in other sequences in which there is profound reorganization of character.

His contention that communication learning III is "difficult" and "rare" for scientists only proves the point that communication is not easily identifiable and determined through objective or quantitative means only. The need for a thorough understanding of human communication becomes possible through qualitative analysis...

...

Cybernetics process and metacommunication becomes more pronounced at this level, since, in the context of group communication, communicators who consciously decide to adopt their own communication acts and meanings contribute to the increased diversity, conflict, and complexity in interaction and communication. This increased diversity, conflict, and complexity is especially evident in the business setting, where people are compelled to group together to formulate solutions in a particular task, problem, or initiative.
In sum, Bateson's insights on cybernetics and metacommunication had been elucidated most clearly in his discourse in "Steps to an ecology of mind." The specific stages in communication learning showed how every level of communication (i.e., intrapersonal, interpersonal, and group communication), Bateson had concretely identified the processes involved while interacting with the self, another communicator, and other people with different cultures and values.

Bibliography

Bateson, G. (1972). Steps to an ecology of mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Littlejohn, S. (1999). Theories of human communication. CA: Wadsworth Publishing Co.

Sources Used in Documents:

Bibliography

Bateson, G. (1972). Steps to an ecology of mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Littlejohn, S. (1999). Theories of human communication. CA: Wadsworth Publishing Co.


Cite this Document:

"Gregory Bateson Second-Order Cybernetics And" (2005, June 06) Retrieved April 27, 2024, from
https://www.paperdue.com/essay/gregory-bateson-second-order-cybernetics-65122

"Gregory Bateson Second-Order Cybernetics And" 06 June 2005. Web.27 April. 2024. <
https://www.paperdue.com/essay/gregory-bateson-second-order-cybernetics-65122>

"Gregory Bateson Second-Order Cybernetics And", 06 June 2005, Accessed.27 April. 2024,
https://www.paperdue.com/essay/gregory-bateson-second-order-cybernetics-65122

Related Documents

Shift From First-order to Second-Order Cybernetics in the Family and Systemic Therapies The strategic family therapy model came up in the 1950s and was inspired by two primary works: the works of Milton Erickson who came up with revolutionary paradoxical interventions which took advantage of people's resistance to change to help alter psychiatric symptoms first; and the works of Gregory Bateson and the Palo Alto Group that made use of

Cybernetics in Family Therapy Family therapy as it is known today has a long and convoluted history. From the days of Freud and Jung, there was a general believe that the individual was solely responsible for whatever has gone wrong in the psyche. Hence, all therapeutic interventions have focused on the individual relationship between therapist and individual. This has been the basis for psychiatric intervention for decades and still forms the