While reading chapter 1, one of the main points that stood out to me was the multiplicity of goods. I always found it interesting how people can have such different views on the same thing. In this opening chapter it states that "Communication ethics in our age begins with the reality of challenges tht we encounter when we come across what appear to be different understandings of the good." (pg 9). This is an important topic when looking at society as a whole and how different cultures view different goods and in our everyday life and how the good can vary from person to person.
When I first came to school here at the University of Minnesota I had a hard time fitting in, mainly because I don't drink. My roommate however, did enjoy going to parties and doing all of that. We both had different views of how to have fun and what we thought was right and wrong. This is when I reached a fork in the road, I could tell him how he wasn't doing the right things and could end up doing something he would regret, or I could let him make his own decisions and let him have his fun and potentially deal with the consequences.
It is interesting because I too for a time did not drink. My family projected onto me that drinking is okay in moderation and to not let things get out of control. I quickly found out that alcohol has an affect on how people act and communicate. There was a year where I did not drink a drop and I found out drinking is a social convention that almost everyone does. But there are positives not to drink, whether it be health advantages or personal satisfaction. I do agree when people are drinking it is hard to relate to them because you are not participating in the convention.
ReplyDeleteThis situation is a good postmodernist way of thinking because someone may have a good ground to not drink or someone may have a strong ground to drink. If someone believes is a common "good" they should promote and protect that theory.