Jerry Monaco wrote:
>
> On 2/6/07, Bill Bartlett <billbartlett at aapt.net.au> wrote:
> > I don't remember ever being so completely baffled by anything as I
> > was trying to comprehend this Double Bind thing-me-jig. Absolutely
> > nothing makes sense of any kind, I don't even have any idea what it
> > is I don't understand, is it some kind of cryptic joke? What's the
> > point?
> >
> > See below my desperate attempts to analyse the riddle:
>
> Very simply. Bateson's point about "Double Binds" was that people, in
> certain relations of dominance, of are put in the following
> situation, which is an expression of a classical logical paradox.
Jerry, I follow this because I am already familiar with it. I would guess that it doesn't help much those who are not already familiar with it. If I am right, and you have only confused those who need clarification, then I think you will have to rethink your December arguments about "clarity" of prose. Your "very simply" hardly washes, since all you do, really, is repeat the explanation that Bill has already said utterly confuses him.
Carrol