Perhaps this is overstated: The "self" might be better said to recede as an experiential argument, becoming, let's say, a sub-argument or side-argument, a "para-self" or self beside the stream of a widened experience.
When someone "learns to perceive and act in terms of the contexts of contexts," that "'self' will take on a sort of irrelevance. The concept of 'self' will no longer function as a nodal argument in the punctuation of experience" (Steps 304).
When someone "learns to perceive and act in terms of the contexts of contexts," that "'self' will take on a sort of irrelevance. The concept of 'self' will no longer function as a nodal argument in the punctuation of experience" (Steps 304).
"Self-corrective sequences" must be "viewed as contexts of learning" for "the systemic difference between them" to be "immediately evident" (M&N, "Appendix," 221).
If you want to understand mental process, look at biological evolution and conversely if you want to understand biological evolution, go look at mental process. -- "Appendix: Time is Out of Joint," (1978), Mind and Nature, p. 245.
There is an "epistemological truth, which will insist that the poles of contrast dividing the persons [politically] are indeed dialectical necessities of the living world" (Mind and Nature, "Appendix," 246).
"My machinery and processes of knowing simply constitute one enormous blind spot. A spot through which I cannot even see that it is blind. Not even any darkness" (A Sacred Unity 226).
Letter dated June 26, 1977. Rpt in G. Bateson, A Sacred Unity: Further Steps to an Ecology of Mind, as "Our Own Metaphor: Nine Years After." Ed. Rodney E. Donaldson. Harper Collins, 1991. 225-242.
"If epistemology must always come between me and my organic perception of the world, and similarly must always come between me and any understanding of myself; if my epistemology is the organizing principle of all my understanding; then I can never know anything" (ASU 226).
“As you know, the difficulty was always to get people to approach the formal analysis of mind with a similar or even an open epistemology. Many people claim to have no epistemology and must just overcome this optimism.” “Afterword,” About Bateson. 1977. 235.
"I have driven myself, over the years, into a 'place' where the conventional dualistic statements of mind-body relations...are absolutely unintelligible to me. It is becoming as difficult for me to understand dualists as it is for them to understand me" (236).
"[T]he multiple insults, the double binds & invasions that we all experience in life,...corrupts our epistemology, challenging the core of our existence,... [and] seduc[es] us into a false cult of the ego,...a false epistemology."
https://t.co/xPUdK1VB0p
"It is characteristic of mind and mental process that, in many of the steps which make up the circuitry of the mind, events are triggered not by force or impact, but by *difference*" ("The Birth of a Matrix or Double Bind and Epistemology," in Beyond the Double Bind, 50).
"All that is not information, not redundancy, not form and not restraints--is noise, the only possible source of *new* information" ("Cybernetic Explanation," Steps, 410).