Visser (2003) examines the origin of the terms “double bind” and “deutero-learning.” He sees it as coming from Bateson’s work on behaviour and learning. Key terms in the article include: proto-learnng and deutero-learning. Visser also distinguishes between 4 types of learning as follows: zero learning; proto-learning; deutero-learning; trito-learning. It is interesting that Visser (2003) shows how Bateson’s work grew out of a study and analysis of behaviour while Tognetti (1999) illustrates how those ideas are applicable in different contexts, including the study of the research process. That means even meaning and interpretation can change – e.g. double bind and deutero-learning are explained differently in the Visser (2003) and Tognetti (1999) articles.
Using and building on the conceptual ideas of Bateson, Tognetti (1999) pushes for post-normal science, which goes beyond the typical boundaries of science. Tognetti (1999) refers to this as a double bind, which is described as science that operates in a fixed context and is biased towards positivist approaches (“doing objective and detached research that builds on established conceptual frameworks” – page 700).
Yet thinking beyond this rigid approach enables “understanding of a higher logical tyvpe because it provides a frame of reference as well as meaning to any given situation” (p. 693). This type of approach also appreciates and recognizes multiple perspectives – e.g. interdisciplinary, cross-cultural points of view. These all help to inform the creation of meaning, reach nuanced decisions and recognize different forms of knowledge in that particular situation.