A quick filler in the sandwich made by Charles' question (below) and Bill
B's (on ch 3)
As I understand Bateson's Learning III, it would not be equivalent to YE's
Learning III. Perhaps YE's LEarning IV?
Bateson discussed Learning II as becoming a kind of person -- character
development. Learning how to negotiate the contexts of activity/action that
one 'enters' -- Again, learning how to be some kind of person.
Learning III is what the zen roshi has learned, that the kind of person
you've supposedly become is not 'who' you are -- that being the kind of
person you know yourself to be -- being smart or Right or Important, or
being humble & compassionate -- however you are reputed to be is not what
matters. Learning III affords a bit of freedom from the patterns of
participation learned at level II....
Half-baked will have to do. Back to reading masters papers -- see ya later,
Judy
At 02:15 PM 4/20/01 -0700, you wrote:
>I'm not sure. Everything that babies learn is unfamiliar territory,
>and so is quite a bit that toddlers learn. Granted that a territory
>is completely unfamiliar, if it is a given context that you are
>working "within," might that not still be level II, and transcending
>the "given context" would be necessary to move to level III? Or is it
>simply enough to be "completely" unfamiliar?
>
>Charles Nelson
>
>
>Judy wrote:
>
>>In a sense, anyone who "is" at level II -- anyone who has learned how to
>>learn and can move across settings; whose experience is punctuated by what
>>counts as a context of action must draw on level III learning in completely
>>unfamiliar territory, where "what counts as a context" of action has to be
>>learned anew. what do you think? or you? or you?
>>judy
>>
>>At 04:35 AM 4/19/01 -0700, you wrote:
>> >
>> >Kathy-- My personal experience is that researchers may be pushed to the
>> >level 3 learning that Bateson talks about, but rarely if ever the kids.
>> >
>> >Unless-- does it count that with the kids you get into interactions where
>> >they are talking with an adult, engaging in joint activity that requires
>> >effort, where they are making real contributions, and the wholel thing
>> >feels like a peer interaction? They seem literally different people at
>> >such times, and their subsequent behavior often has them taking on more
>> >adult responsibilities. no one tells them to changein this way. Its
>> >not just a new habit is it? or is it?
>> >mike
>> >heading for underwater minnesotta
>> >
>> >
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue May 01 2001 - 01:01:56 PDT