Volume 16 · Number 1 · Pages 101–107
Metalogue: How to Understand Bateson? In Memoriam Graham Barnes (1936-2020)

Graham Barnes & Miran Možina

Log in download the full text in PDF

> Citation > Similar > References > 1 Comment

Abstract

Context: For Graham Barnes, the starting point of his research was the observation that most psychotherapists are trained in a theory-centered style of practice, neglecting epistemological and hermeneutical aspects. The consequence is an absence of critical self-reflection about some basic assumptions of psychotherapy theories and clinical practices in the psychotherapy community. When using a particular theory, therapists forget that the theory is “using” them, as well, i.e., they are unaware of the effects the theory has on them and on their relationships with clients. As an alternative to this ignorance, Barnes developed the concept, research project and clinical application of what he called “second-order psychotherapy.” Problem: How can we encourage therapists to engage in systematic self-reflection on the influence of theory on the content and structure of their therapeutic conversations? Following Bateson’s epistemological guidelines, we give an example of how our conversation about understanding his ideas includes conversation about our understanding of the conversation about an understanding of his ideas. Method: Bateson created a new didactic form of dialogical presentation to facilitate the understanding of knowing, called a metalogue, in which the content and the structure of the conversation are intertwined in such a way that it becomes more transparent how the metalevel of relationships between the speakers influences the content and vice versa. Results: By presenting our dialogues as an exemplary metalogue, we propose that metalogues could be a valuable didactic way for promoting epistemological and constructivist teaching and learning, not only for psychotherapists, but for all professionals who need better understanding of their understanding. This second-order understanding opens the space for the inclusion of self-reflection on our relationship (and its evolution) and how our relationship has shaped our understanding. Implications: Our proposal is also meant as an encouragement for contemporary constructivist thinkers to continue to reflect on Bateson’s contribution to the foundation and evolution of constructivism.

Key words: Cybernetic epistemology, second-order psychotherapy, dialogotherapy, self-referential awareness, understanding, difference, schizophrenia, double bind, innocence

Handling Editor: Alexander Riegler

Citation

Barnes G. & Možina M. (2020) Metalogue: How to understand Bateson? In memoriam graham barnes (1936-2020). Constructivist Foundations 16(1): 101–107. https://constructivist.info/16/1/101

Export article citation data: Plain Text · BibTex · EndNote · Reference Manager (RIS)

Similar articles

Dykstra Jr. D. (2005) Against Realist Instruction
Rusch G. (2007) Understanding. The Mutual Regulation of Cognition and Culture
Schmidt S. J. (2011) From Objects to Processes: A Proposal to Rewrite Radical Constructivism
Füllsack M. (2016) Circularity and the Micro-Macro-Difference
Matyja J. R. & Schiavio A. (2013) Enactive Music Cognition: Background and Research Themes

References

Barnes G. (1994) Justice, love and wisdom: Linking psychotherapy to second-order cybernetics. Medicinska naklada, Zagreb. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Barnes G. (2002) Psychopathology of psychotherapy: A cybernetic study of theory. PhD thesis. School of Social Science and Planning, RMIT University, Melbourne. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Barnes G. (2008) An introduction to dialogotherapy. Kairos – Slovenian Journal of Psychotherapy 2(3–4): 25–60. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Bateson G. (1985) Mind and nature: A necessary unity. Flamingo edition, London. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Bateson G. (1987) Steps to an ecology of mind: Collected essays in anthropology, psychiatry, evolution, and epistemology. Jason Aronson, London. Originally published in 1972. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Bateson G. (1991) A sacred unity: Further steps to an ecology of mind. Edited by R. E. Donaldson. HarperCollins, New York. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Bateson G. (ed.) (1974) Perceval’s narrative: A patient’s account of his psychosis, 1830–1832. William Marrow, New York. Originally published in 1962. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Bateson M. C. (2005) Our own metaphor: A personal account of a conference on the effects of conscious purpose in human adaptation. Hampton Press, Cresskill. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Berger M. (1978) Plenary session dialogue ending conference. In: Berger M. (ed.) Beyond the double bind: Communication and family systems, theories, and techniques with schizophrenics. Brunner Mazel, New York: 191–196. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Brockman J. (1977) Introduction. In: Brockman J. (ed.) About Bateson. Irwin & Company, Toronto: 3–18. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Charlton N. G. (2008) Understanding Gregory Bateson: Mind, beauty, and the sacred earth. State University of New York Press, Albany. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Foerster H. von (1989) Circular causality: The beginnings of an epistemology of responsibility. In: McCulloch R. (ed.) The collected works of Warren S. McCulloch. Intersystems Publication, Salinas: 808–829. https://cepa.info/1711
Keeney B. (1983) Aesthetics of change. The Guilford Press, New York. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Langer S. K. (1957) Philosophy in a new key. Harvard University Press, Cambridge. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Levy R. A., Ablon J. S. & Kächele H. (2012) Psychodynamic psychotherapy research: Evidence-based practice and practice-based evidence. Springer, New York. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Maturana H. R. & Varela F. J. (1988) The tree of knowledge: The biological roots of human understanding. Shambala, Boston. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Možina M. (2010) O psihoterapevtovi gotovosti v negotovost, dvojni vezi in paradoksih [About psychotherapist’s certainty in the uncertainty, double bind and paradoxes]. Kairos – Slovenian Journal of Psychotherapy 4(1–2): 67–96. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Možina M. (2019) Uvodnik o milini, estetski občutljivosti in Gregoryju Batesonu [Editorial about grace, aesthetic sensibility and Gregory Bateson]. Kairos – Slovenian Journal of Psychotherapy 13(1–2): 7–23. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Safran J. D. & Muran J. C. (2000) Negotiating the therapeutic alliance: A relational treatment guide. Guilford Press, New York. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Safran J. D. & Muran J. C. (2000) Resolving therapeutic alliance ruptures: Diversity and integration. Psychotherapy in Practice 56(2): 233–243. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Safran J. D. (1993) Breaches in the therapeutic alliance: An arena for negotiating authentic relatedness. Psychotherapy 30: 11–24. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Safran J. D., Muran J. C., Samstag L. W. & Steven C. (2002) Repairing alliance ruptures. In: Norcross J. C. (ed.) Psychotherapy relationships that work. Oxford University Press, Oxford: 235–254. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Spencer Brown G. (1973) Laws of form. Bantam, New York. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Tramonti F. (2019) Toward an ecological responsibility: Bateson’s aesthetic sensibility as a guiding principle for therapeutic relationships. Kairos – Slovenian Journal of Psychotherapy 13(1–2): 141–151. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Yalom I. D. & Leszcz M. (2005) Group psychotherapy. 5th edition. Basic Books, New York. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Yalom I. D. (2002) The gift of therapy: An open letter to a new generation of therapists and their patients. HarperCollins Publishers, New York. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar

Comments: 1

To stay informed about comments to this publication and post comments yourself, please log in first.

Comment by Irina Ptitsyna · 04 Dec 2020
Bateson’s Double Blind versus Pavlov’s Experimental Neurosis
Irina Ptitsyna
ptiirina@yandex.ru
The test examines the role of constructivism as a methodological principle that allows combining the approaches of researchers with different philosophical attitudes. Using the example of comparing the double bind of the radical constructivist Gregory Bateson and the experimental neurosis of the materialist Ivan P. Pavlov, a unified constructivist principle of the formation of the phenomena underlying these concepts is shown.