{"id":540,"date":"2025-10-18T19:09:29","date_gmt":"2025-10-19T02:09:29","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/mdia300\/?p=540"},"modified":"2025-10-28T02:50:24","modified_gmt":"2025-10-28T09:50:24","slug":"learning-to-learn-bateson-through-ingolds-making","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/mdia300\/archives\/540","title":{"rendered":"Learning to Learn:\u00a0Bateson Through Ingold\u2019s Making"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n
\"\"
Image of Gregory Bateson<\/strong><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Contributors:<\/strong>\u00a0Adela Lynge, Eira Nguyen, Maryam Abusamak<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Gregory Bateson: The Mind in Everything<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

If Tim Ingold\u2019s Making<\/em> is a conversation between hands, minds, and materials, then Gregory Bateson is one of the most intriguing voices echoing through it. Bateson (1904\u20131980) was a British anthropologist and systems theorist whose curiosity ranged from communication and psychology to dolphin research and cybernetics. His big question was simple but radical: how do living systems learn and know?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Bateson\u2019s most influential work, Steps to an Ecology of Mind<\/em> (1973), gathers essays that link culture, biology, and communication into one vision. He argued that the mind is not really locked inside a human skull but distributed across relationships between people, tools, and environments. This idea formed his \u201cecology of mind,\u201d which essentially is a living system of thought that includes the world itself. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

One of his key concepts, deutero-learning or \u201clearning to learn,\u201d describes how organisms adapt not just by gaining information but by tuning into patterns of interaction. It\u2019s the skill of learning from experience, of letting the world teach you. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Bateson\u2019s influence stretches far beyond anthropology; he inspired thinkers in systems theory, ecology, and even digital design. (Fun fact: he was once married to anthropologist Margaret Mead, and their joint fieldwork in Bali transformed how both understood culture and communication.) <\/p>\n\n\n\n

For Ingold, Bateson provides the perfect foundation. Making<\/em> takes up Bateson\u2019s call to think relationally: knowing and making are not separate from the world but arise within it. Bateson\u2019s insight that \u201ceverything is connected\u201d becomes Ingold\u2019s guiding thread, the sense that to know is to correspond<\/em> with the materials and forces that shape life itself.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Tim Ingold: Embodying the Ecology of Mind<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n

We kept circling back to that opening scene in Making<\/em>, where Ingold recalls the Saami people telling him, \u201cKnow for yourself!\u201d<\/em> (p. 1). At first, it sounds like tough love. But by the next page, it becomes the seed of his entire method. He realizes that \u201cthe only way one can really know things\u2026 is through a process of self-discovery\u201d<\/em> that knowing is movement<\/em> (pp. 1\u20132). Bateson\u2019s idea of learning within an ecology of mind<\/em> (1973) suddenly becomes embodied. The world, Ingold says, \u201cbecomes a place of study\u2026 [we] learn from those with whom we study\u201d<\/em> (p. 2).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

That insight, learning with<\/em> rather than about<\/em>, is the engine that drives the book \u2014 every chapter is a variation on it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Bateson imagined learning as recursive feedback within an \u201cecology of mind<\/em>\u201d (1973): perception and action constantly reshape one another. Ingold keeps this loop but breathes life into it. He argues that anthropology itself must be a process of engagement rather than extraction. Participant observation, he insists, is \u201cabsolutely not a technique of data collection \u2026 it is enshrined in an ontological commitment \u2026 a way of knowing from the inside<\/em>\u201d (p. 5). To cut the loop into \u201cdata<\/em>\u201d is, he warns, to \u201cturn the relation between knowing and being inside out<\/em>\u201d (p. 5).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Bateson\u2019s deutero-learning describes how we acquire habits of response, learning to perceive and adjust to patterns across contexts. Ingold builds directly on this by introducing the concept of correspondence, which is essentially the mutual shaping that happens between the maker, the materials, and the environment. \u201cThe conduct of thought,\u201d he writes, \u201cgoes along with the fluxes and flows of the materials with which we work. These materials think in us, as we think through them\u201d (p. 6). To know from the inside is to inhabit that flux, to move and be moved, to think as life thinks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Bateson\u2019s theories become especially relevant in Making\u2019s <\/em>seventh chapter: Bodies on the Run. To Ingold, a body is alive when it leaks, exuding itself into its environment and engaging in a constant exchange of material between surroundings and self. Ingold once again relates this to the concept of correspondence, arguing that we are our bodies and experience ourselves moving in ongoing response to the materials surrounding us. Bateson\u2019s concept of deutero-learning is referenced when Ingold expresses that the body, as a site of unfolding activity, is something to think from<\/em> rather than about <\/em>(p. 94). <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Bateson\u2019s voice holds strong in Making<\/em> when placed in conversation with other theorists. As Ingold ponders the mind\u2019s role in the flow of materials, Bateson\u2019s concept of the ecology of mind is used as an argument against Chris Gosden\u2019s beliefs (p. 97). While Gosden is against studying the concept of the mind altogether, Bateson argues for our ability to retain an ecology of mind that complements an ecology of substance, the first dealing with information and the second with the exchange of energy and materials. Bateson\u2019s legacy also ripples through later thinkers that Ingold references, such as Andy Clark, whose influential theory of the \u201cextended mind\u201d argues that cognition spreads across brain, body, and environment (p. 97).  <\/p>\n\n\n

\n
\"\"
Tim Ingold, Lecture: \u201cTelling by Hand: Weaving, Drawing, Writing Photography\u201d at Text and Textiles<\/em> Conference, University of Aberdeen, 2012. Photography by: Patricia Pires Boulhosa.<\/strong><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n
\n

<\/p>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

As a group, we were intrigued by how Ingold\u2019s argument keeps circling back to the body in motion, particularly the hand. Ingold writes that, \u201cHands, in a word, can tell, both in their attentiveness to the conditions of a task as it unfolds, and in their gestural movements and the inscriptions they yield\u201d (p. 116). Here, the hand becomes a site of knowing. He writes that its intelligence, \u201carises as an emergent property of the entire \u2018form-creating system\u2019\u2026 comprising the gestural synergy of human being, tool and material.\u201d Ingold earlier in the book describes this as \u201ca correspondence between mindful attention and lively materials conducted by skilled hands \u201cat the trowel\u2019s edge\u201d (p. 11). <\/p>\n\n\n\n

This again echoes Bateson\u2019s idea of learning as a continuous adjustment to patterns and relations, but Ingold grounds it in body practice. The hand learns by feeling its way forward, guided by touch, rhythm, and resistance. It knows through kinesthesia, the awareness of movements that connects body and world. In this way, Ingold transforms Bateson\u2019s theoretical circuit of learning into a living, embodied correspondence, showing that knowing is not something the mind possesses but something the body performs in motion.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Ingold brings his argument full circle by linking the movement of the hand to that of the entire body, drawing a beautiful connection between dance, writing, and kinesthesia. The quality of movement when writing by hand shares the rhythm and tempo of one\u2019s bodily gestures, and \u201cextends into the lines that appear on the paper,\u201d with these lines arising from experiences and in turn carrying us through life. Rejecting the idea of movement as the mere connection between points, Ingold argues that there is no singular end goal to learning as new opportunities are constantly emerging, and that one must wander the world at their own pace in a constant act of curious self-discovery (pp. 140, 141)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In this final sentiment that concludes Making<\/em>, Ingold reiterates Bateson\u2019s idea of learning as an ongoing process of adaptation within a living system, an ecology of mind where every gesture, like every thought, grows through its connections to what came before and what is yet to come.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Tracing the Source: Learning to Read Critically<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n

As a group, we wanted to go beyond simply accepting Ingold\u2019s use of Bateson at face value and instead ask: what happens when we go to Bateson himself? What steps does Steps to an Ecology of Mind<\/em> actually give us that Ingold selectively uses for his own argument-making purpose? <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Ingold takes Bateson\u2019s cybernetic loops and transforms them into lines of correspondence, which are less mechanical and simpler. Where Bateson spoke of systems and information exchange, Ingold speaks of walking, waving, and touching. As he says, \u201cWe owe our very being to the world we seek to know\u201d (p. 5). So while Ingold emphasizes harmony through openness, Bateson was more cautious. Bateson\u2019s notion of double bind also shows how communication can entrap rather than enlighten, which is something that Ingold barely acknowledges. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

We realized that maybe Ingold chooses the generative side of Bateson\u2019s ideas, the more optimistic ones, sustaining growth. Still, this selective use of Bateson\u2019s theory gives Ingold\u2019s research a more distinctive perspective. He does not simply borrow Bateson\u2019s idea, but as a companion to think with<\/em> and bring his theory to life. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

This assignment really made us think about how theory travels, how one thinker borrows from another, reshapes their ideas, and sometimes leaves important pieces behind. Going back to Bateson’s theory helped us see that Ingold is rather reinterpreting<\/em> it, molding it to fit his vision of anthropology as a living, embodied practice.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

We learned that while authors may present strong and convincing arguments, the way theories are chosen, interpreted, and explained is often shaped by their own biases, purposes, and perspectives. This is natural. We are not neutral beings. It doesn\u2019t mean that we should doubt everything we read, but we should stay aware of how knowledge is constructed and framed. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

As media studies students, we think maintaining a critical mindset allows us to engage more deeply with theory, to see not only what an author is saying, but also why and how they are saying it. It\u2019s about reading with curiosity and care, recognizing that every interpretation is a creative act that both reveals and reshapes the ideas it draws from.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n

References<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Ingold, Tim. Making: Anthropology, Archaeology, Art, and Architecture<\/em>. Routledge, 2013. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cGregory Bateson.\u201d Encyclopaedia Britannica, Encyclopaedia Britannica, Inc.,https:\/\/www.britannica.com\/biography\/Gregory-Bateson<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Image credits: <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Haftner, Keeley. \u201cKeeley Haftner.\u201d Bad at Sports<\/em>, 30 Jan. 2018, badatsports.com\/2018\/thinks-tim-ingold\/<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Vincent van, Vliet. \u201cGregory Bateson Biography, Quotes and Books.\u201d Toolshero<\/em>, 27 Aug. 2024, www.toolshero.com\/toolsheroes\/gregory-bateson<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n


Contributors: <\/strong>Adela Lynge, Eira Nguyen, Maryam Abusamak<\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Contributors:\u00a0Adela Lynge, Eira Nguyen, Maryam Abusamak Gregory Bateson: The Mind in Everything If Tim Ingold\u2019s Making is a conversation between hands, minds, and materials, then Gregory Bateson is one of the most intriguing voices echoing through it. Bateson (1904\u20131980) was a British anthropologist and systems theorist whose curiosity ranged from communication and psychology to dolphin … Continue reading Learning to Learn:\u00a0Bateson Through Ingold\u2019s Making<\/span> →<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":100849,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[90,88,87],"class_list":["post-540","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-other","tag-gregory-bateson","tag-ingold","tag-source-traceback"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/mdia300\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/540","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/mdia300\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/mdia300\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/mdia300\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/100849"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/mdia300\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=540"}],"version-history":[{"count":7,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/mdia300\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/540\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":674,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/mdia300\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/540\/revisions\/674"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/mdia300\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=540"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/mdia300\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=540"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/mdia300\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=540"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}