Concepts in Defining Communication

Defining communication calls for two different approaches. The two approaches that communication is defined by is; discovery and constructionist. Discovery looks at the world through different phenomena. Observing objects and their features is describing something that already exists as “objective” in its process and is called discovery. The opposing view point looks at the world that assumes that human try to define everything, and don’t live by independently acquiring human knowledge. This view is defined as subjective constructionist. The problem with defining communication is there are many definitions. It seems like there is no one singular definition that can cover all the different perspectives on what communication is. There are many questions that surround how to define communication but as it seems the best route is whatever the style of the sender is. More so, models can help us describe but defining communication seems like a difficult task. Communication is not always intentional because we’re always communicating, whether it’s non verbal or verbal so to determine if communication is a persuasive/ audience oriented act would be too difficult.

The Pragmatic View

The pragmatic perspective takes a different view. The pragmatic view is an interlocking system that contributes different or individual behaviors that pattern “over time.’ The problem I see with patterns is that it’s not always a fit. Having a destructive pattern is never a fit. For example, being a drug addict is a destructive life form. The same exists with communication. There are patterns in the way people communicate and the pragmatic perspective views communication through those patterned interactions. In a lot of ways the perspective is like a game as it looks at games as a pattern. For example a quarterback’s pass being knocked down at the line scrimmage because he through side arm. In addition, games have structure and are organized systems. In general communication is like a game that has participants and end act sequences. It’s not like a game because communication is not competitive as much as it is ‘norm.’

Social Constructionist Theory

The social constructionist perspective views communication as a “process” where people utilize “tools” that are supplied by culture which creates “collective representations of reality.” Basically, it’s an intercultural communication between “culture and communication.” Some ideas of culture are domestic family orientation. Whereby other cultures and countries represent stronger family orientation and strong core values including arranged marriages. In lot of cases, people identify with what society drives. I believe there is a close tie between geographies and culture. For example if you’re in the Midwest there is a greater emphasis on farming. However in California there is a greater drive towards being money driven. In Mexico there is a greater drive towards freedom. In other words, it’s what surrounds us that drive representation to reality. The cultural tools that the model specifies are symbolic codes, cognitive customs, cultural traditions and sets of roles and rules. Each plays a different role in the social constructionist perspective.

My Most liked Concept

The classical period is one of the most fascinating periods I’ve read about. I’m not sure if it’s because I’m Italian or if it’s because of all the history that went on during that time. Nonetheless, the classical period has proven to be one of the greatest study of western communication. During the classical period, public speaking became one of the most popular source for entertainment and study. Many theories have come out in regards to this popularity. One of the most interesting and common concepts discussed in this period was the relationship between a speaker and their audience. George Campbell, a classic rhetorician, wrote about this concept and believed that “receivers were active participants in the persuasion process and that the effective communicator studied the inner workings of faculties of the human mind.” What Campbell discovered is that persuasion begins with both the speaker and audience involved-placing the audience as the center of interaction. Although this concept is very important in communication it’s important to still try and understand the “experiences and motivations of individual receivers.”

An Orator's Morality

I believe the Greeks were correct; an orator has to be morally good. Orator’s can influence opinion and therefore need to send a message that is morally superior. A good example of morality with public orators is censorship. The U.S. government has constantly monitored and censored various media aspects to make sure that people are not negatively influenced. More specifically, media has become of great influence in persuasion. With all the different forms of media, people are constantly influenced by things they identify with. However, topics audiences identify with are not always good for society and therefore could cause harm to society, such as crime. The connection between goodness, truth and communication is the same connection I share with admiration to Steve Jobs. If we exchanged the idea of Steve Jobs with an immoral leader, such as Hitler, you would then be able to see the importance of goodness and truth within public communication.

The Speaker I Admire the Most

The speaker I admire the most is Steve Jobs. Steve Jobs is the President and CEO of Apple Computer. Job’s speaks with great passion towards the product and brand his company represents. I believe it makes his audience as passionate as he is about the same products. I believe his power to persuade stems from pathos because it seems like everything he says has a lot of emotion behind it. I sell computer products, so my ability to persuade others comes at being more ethos and logos. I have to, not only be credible, but I have to be logical as I’m trying to solve business problems. Of course, professionals don’t buy into people without credibility which is why I have to be more credible. I believe that I have a very open way of communication that builds trust with in my audience. Aristotle’s classification works well for not only me but for the speaker I admire the most, Steve Jobs.