Paul H. Dillon writes:
>book-blinded I never associated Bateson with your request for looking at
>meta-messages.
in my understanding
bateson's theory of the double bind required:
1) at least two people in a power relationship of inequality (perceived by
one of them as such, anyway)
2) a history or pattern of experiencing the double bind situation
3) a primary injunction made by the person who has the power to punish
(g.b. claimed it had to be negative, but i think there only has to be a
conflict between levels)
and 4) a secondary injunction with its attendant threat of punishment that
contradicts the primary one. this secondary injunction is usually
communicated through nonverbal means and it is _never_ talked about.
it seems like CHAT could open up many insights into such a process that is
so dependent on history, context, and activities, on factors beside or
beyond language.
i can't say for sure what i was trying to do by asking about conversation
about how we communicate except that one major "rule" for the double bind
is that conversation about the contradictory messages is always forbidden.
what would happen if the forbidden was talked about?
what did happen?
what is happening?
kathie
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
.........Our words misunderstand us..............................
.....We are our words, and black and bruised and blue.
Under our skins, we're laughing....................................
.........................Adrienne Rich..................................
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Katherine_Goff@ceo.cudenver.edu
http://ceo.cudenver.edu/~katherine_goff/index.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue May 23 2000 - 09:20:37 PDT