I have thought of the “substance-form” idea (also Gregory Bateson - form, pattern and relationship rather than content, related persons/phenomena etc.) as something important to understand, however, I haven't quite wrapped my head around it. How to describe the form of a problem? It’s not clear to me what it means to focus on form and pattern rather than on the content and substance when describing a situation.
I was also reminded of Bateson’s description of how the lions in Trafalgar Square could have well been some other beasts but would have held a completely different meaning if they were made out of wood. Is this related to the same idea?
I see, as James has previously written — the problem/the existing situation can be mostly forgotten about and instead attention should be focused on the desired state-of-affairs.
The use of the word "invariance" to describe what pattern means in this context really does make it more understandable to me. Thank you for the explanation!
I haven't come across PCT before but the video was very good and thought-provoking indeed. Really helps with tying things together. I feel like I need to give it another watch soon.
About Bateson — I feel like he's writings are an endless source of knowledge on almost any subject. James introduced me to "Steps" a few years ago and it has really influenced my thinking. And will do so in the future as there's so much I don't fully understand yet.
That's a good question. I'm not sure I can name a favourite chapter — most of them (if not all) are interesting in some way. And I don't have Steps organised in my head in chapters. However, some ideas/topics I have found most inspirational:
- Unit of mind, unit of survival, and their relationship to each other --> How to think about evolution.
I have thought of the “substance-form” idea (also Gregory Bateson - form, pattern and relationship rather than content, related persons/phenomena etc.) as something important to understand, however, I haven't quite wrapped my head around it. How to describe the form of a problem? It’s not clear to me what it means to focus on form and pattern rather than on the content and substance when describing a situation.
I was also reminded of Bateson’s description of how the lions in Trafalgar Square could have well been some other beasts but would have held a completely different meaning if they were made out of wood. Is this related to the same idea?
Thank you for the thorough answer!
I see, as James has previously written — the problem/the existing situation can be mostly forgotten about and instead attention should be focused on the desired state-of-affairs.
The use of the word "invariance" to describe what pattern means in this context really does make it more understandable to me. Thank you for the explanation!
I haven't come across PCT before but the video was very good and thought-provoking indeed. Really helps with tying things together. I feel like I need to give it another watch soon.
About Bateson — I feel like he's writings are an endless source of knowledge on almost any subject. James introduced me to "Steps" a few years ago and it has really influenced my thinking. And will do so in the future as there's so much I don't fully understand yet.
That's a good question. I'm not sure I can name a favourite chapter — most of them (if not all) are interesting in some way. And I don't have Steps organised in my head in chapters. However, some ideas/topics I have found most inspirational:
- Unit of mind, unit of survival, and their relationship to each other --> How to think about evolution.
- Everything about dreams.
- Mammalian communication.
- Double-bind and schizophrenia.
Thanks for the link, I'll check it out!