In which Bateson argues that the efficacy of Alcoholics Anonymous is (in a Western, Cartesian context) comes at least in part from providing a more correct epistemology/ontology that subsumes a reified “self” into a larger system/circuit. The alcoholic is, by “hitting bottom,” forced to shift from a destructive symmetrical to a complementary pattern of relation with the system.
When it comes to the internal logic of the paper, I have a few questions:
destructive schismogenesis is said to be possible either in symmetric or complementary modes. so if AA does promote an “almost entirely complementary” epistemology, (1) are there negative consequences? (2) is this realistic (even if more realistic than the cartesian reification of the self?) the author himself seems to beckon at a similar question at the end now that I look at it again
also obviously I’m just getting into this discourse now & it’s been going on a while so I wonder to what extent this binary has been elaborated upon in cybernetic theory