⏺ Learning: 'Jeremiah Johnson' (Corvo rosso non avrai il mio scalpo) by Sydney Pollack (1972)

⏺ Jeremiah Johnson is a perfect example of what Gregory Bateson has defined as 'Learning 2'.
★ Towards the end of the film Robert Redford has a bloody clash with several Indians: Redford, though wounded, kills many enemies and then chases the last one left (those who have seen the film maybe will remember that this is a little chubby and clumsy) and is about to reach him; the choices for the Redskin, at this point, are: to flee faster (but he is not able to do it) or turn against Redford and fight (but has no hope against such a strong opponent); the possibilities that are offered to him is not satisfactory and just a leap of logic such as 'learning to learn' can save him; he, in fact, makes a mental leap to higher logic level, moving on a different set of alternatives (from all of the possibilities offered by ‘fighting’ he changes to that of the various forms of ‘religion’) and, kneeling in the snow, begins to sing an Indian song (presumably a sacred song of death); the choice is the right one, since Redford is amazed, stops, stays for a bit undecided and then goes away, confused, saving the life of the Redskin.
★ Bateson wrote about many levels of learning:
⏺ ‘Learning 0’ is characterized by the specificity of the response, that is not susceptible to correction; it is thus a simple reception of information by an external event, an event that will always bring the same information; ie: from the school bell I learn that the hour of lesson is over and every time I will hear that particular sound I will always get the same information.
⏺ ‘Learning 1’ is a change in the mode of the response, by means of the correction of errors made in the choice of a set of alternative possibilities; it comes to those cases in which at a later time the individual gives a different response. The best-known case of ‘Learning 1’ is related to Pavlovian conditioning: in the 'moment 2' the dog (object of the experiment) secretes saliva in response to the sound of a bell, while this did not occur in the previous 'moment 1'. Learning can only occur in cases of repeatability and identity of the "context" in which learning takes place.
How can we define a 'context'? I suggest this definition: the set of 'degrees of freedom' and 'constraints' ‘perceived’ by the subject. This is the 'individual context' that guides the actions of each of us when we act on the basis of 'degrees of freedom' perceived and we do NOT do some things on the basis of 'constraints' perceived. When more people act in the same context, becomes necessary a comparison between the various individual contexts perceived and the solution you get (by reasoning or by brute force) is what we can call the 'shared context', which becomes law and rule for those who live in that context.
⏺ ‘Learning 2’ ('learning to learn' or ‘deutero-learning’) is a change in the process of 'learning 1', for example a corrective change of all the alternatives among which you may make a choice; while in the case of 'learning 1' the effort exerted in learning is to change our way of thinking and/or act as part of a set pre-established and foreknew of possibilities, in the case of level ‘2’ is realized a real ‘leap of logic’ that allows moving towards a new and different set of alternatives of higher level, in which to perform the right choice. For these reasons, the ability to 'learn to learn' is of crucial importance, since it enables one to break free by visions current (when insufficient) and open up new visions, becoming more masters of their own thoughts and actions. The ability to learn how to learn is then connected to the 'past', as just seen, because it is in the dimension of time that has been created and stratified our character and our habits; it is also 'present-oriented', since is an instrument of decisive importance to tend to the resolution of those current problems that are still without solution; it is in addition 'future-oriented', being our main resource to address and successfully manage both future moments of difficulty and crisis, both personal development.
⏺ ‘Learning 3’ is a change in the process of the 'Learning 2'. If the ego is a product-aggregate of 'Learning 2', the jump to the higher level makes peripheral the significance and limited the importance of the ego (and of our character and our habits). The ‘Learning 3’ seems to occur relatively rarely, especially in cases where there is a major reorganization of the character, in religious conversions, in mystical crisis, etc., namely in all those situations where you really feel, at the human personality level, a "leap" that - in cases like these - can actually change the meaning of existence for those who come to live experiences at this level.
Subscribe to My Main Channel:
/ @marionicolamisino
🎭 The Words of the Movies 🎭
• 🎭 Le parole del cinem...