Cybernetics of Cybernetics - Understanding Understanding: Essays on Cybernetics and Cognition - page 284

the elementary nucleus for a society. Let me repeat the three concepts that
are in a triadic fashion connected to each other. They are: first, the observers;
second, the language they use; and third, the society they form by the use of
their language. This interrelationship can be compared, perhaps, with the
interrelationship between the chicken, and the egg, and the rooster. You
cannot say who was first and you cannot say who was last. You need all three
in order to have all three. In order to appreciate what I am going to say it
might be advantageous to keep this closed triadic relation in mind.
I have no doubts that you share with me the conviction that the central
problems of today are societal. On the other hand, the gigantic problem-
solving conceptual apparatus that evolved in our Western culture is counter-
productive not only for solving but essentially for perceiving social problems.
One root for our cognitive blind spot that disables us to perceive social prob-
lems is the tradition\al explanatory paradigm which rests on two operation:
One is causation , the other one deduction . It is interesting to note that some-
thing that cannot be explained—that is, for which we cannot show a cause or
for which we do not have a reason—we do not wish to see. In other words,
something that cannot be explained cannot be seen. This is driven home
again and again by Don Juan, a Yaqui Indian, Carlos Casteneda's mentor. 2-5
It is quite clear that in his teaching efforts Don Juan wants to make a
cognitive blind spot in Castaneda's vision to be filled with new perceptions;
he wants to make him “see”. This is doubly difficult, because of Castaneda's
dismissal of experiences as “illusions” for which he has no explanations on
the one hand, and because of a peculiar property of the logical structure of
the phenomenon “blind spot” on the other hand; and this is that we do not
perceive our blind spot by, for instance, seeing a black spot close to the
center of our visual field: we do not see that we have a blind spot. In other
words, we do not see that we do not see. This I will call a second order defi-
ciency, and the only way to overcome such deficiencies is with therapies of
second order.
The popularity of Carlos Castaneda's topics suggest to me that his points
are being understood: new paradigms emerge. I'm using the term “para-
digm” in the sense of Thomas Kuhn 6 who wants to indicate with this term
a culture specific, or language specific, stereotype or model for linking
descriptions semantically. As you may remember, Thomas Kuhn argues that
there is a major change in paradigms when the one in vogue begins to fail,
shows inconsistencies or contradictions. I however argue that I can name
at least two instances in which not the emergent defectiveness of the dom-
inant paradigm but its very flawlessness is the cause for its rejection. One
of these instances was Copernicus' novel vision of a heliocentric planetary
system which he perceived at a time when the Ptolemaeic geocentric system
was at its height as to accuracy of its predictions. The other instance, I
submit, is being brought about today by some of us who cannot—by their
life—pursue any longer the flawless, but sterile path that explores the prop-
erties seen to reside within objects, and turn around to explore their very