Interpersonal communication is a conversation between a group of two to four people. Through this conversation, the book talks a lot about how distance and responsibility to the relationship matter. I liked the concept of distance and I feel that it is prevalent with college students. Students go off to college and are away from home and somehow realize that their relationship with their parents or siblings got stronger. With living with them for so many years and then going to college you can finally step back and realize the bigger picture, it allows for one to appreciate the relationship so much more. This is essential for a relationship because we all need our own space and it allows us to appreciate that moment or memory we created with that person."Philosophically, distance makes memories possible"(125). There is also the interpersonal responsibility of a person to nourish and care for that relationship. "good personality, or interpersonal style, linked with interpersonal responsibility, or character, leads to long-term relational health"(127). Without proper nourishment or support of a relationship, it will soon become less strong and lead to a termination of a relationship.
I started to think about the internet relating to interpersonal communication and how distance and interpersonal responsibility has a role in that. When we go away to college we have technology to stay in touch with our friends and family. Distance allows for a better realization of the relationship but sometimes the lack of responsibility allows for some high school friendships to fade. for example, we are away at college and we decide to text a friend and they don't text back, this affects the nourishment of the relationship and that friends responsibility to text you back. At the same time if you are personally with a friend and you decide to be on your phone to text other people it devalues your relationship with the person you are with and values the people you are texting. Technology and cellphones have become this contradictory commodity in our society for communicating.
Friday, October 23, 2015
Monday, October 19, 2015
Chapter 6
Chapter 6 discuses the concept about Public Discourse which can be understood in communication ethics“…that diversity thrives upon differenation of public and private space” (105). which you can understand through three different praxis. Public discourseIt is the idea that we need to respect that there are different ideas in the public sphere as well as in private space and that we always need to pay attention how we express our own ideas in these different environments.“conversation about ideas in civic/community contexts marked by diversity of perspectives requiring thoughtful public engagement (101)
I think the book brings up a very example about internet where a lot of different ideas are being exposed, social media has become the biggest source for that. It involves engaging different ideas and where people have to think about how much they want to share about their opinions and about themselves, the book talks about this as the "differentiation of public and private space".
I believe that social media has almost became dangerous since people tend to use it to express their ideas and hate that they would never express in a face to face situation. Personally I try not to express myself tou much and if I do I try to keep it very civil. "The public arena is not a place of ideology where there is one idea; it is a to oust place of multiple perspectives and ideas"(103). I often get very mad when browsing through either comments on twitter or on Facebook where people often express a lot of hate because others may not think the same as them, these ideas di simply “it works to protect and promote the public good”(101).
I think the book brings up a very example about internet where a lot of different ideas are being exposed, social media has become the biggest source for that. It involves engaging different ideas and where people have to think about how much they want to share about their opinions and about themselves, the book talks about this as the "differentiation of public and private space".
I believe that social media has almost became dangerous since people tend to use it to express their ideas and hate that they would never express in a face to face situation. Personally I try not to express myself tou much and if I do I try to keep it very civil. "The public arena is not a place of ideology where there is one idea; it is a to oust place of multiple perspectives and ideas"(103). I often get very mad when browsing through either comments on twitter or on Facebook where people often express a lot of hate because others may not think the same as them, these ideas di simply “it works to protect and promote the public good”(101).
Public Discourse Ethics
Public discourse ethics as defined in the book "protects and promotes a place of conversation for diversity of ideas and persons" (100). When you look deep into the actual true definition behind this topic, it's similar to dialogic ethics in the sense that a "learning in difference" is prevalent. A big difference, however, with public discourse is that a conversation requires contending of ideas.
A main area of focus is the differentiation of public and private space. Public space is different from private space in the main essence that public space requires a certain level of consideration before communicating. I mean, one example would deal with social media. It's prevalent in a lot of people's lives. Unfortunately, it's not always seen as an ideal way to present yourself. "Identity emerges with clarity through differentiation" (106). A lot of people tend to post their frustration, which can receive some controversy. Whenever a celebrity or athletes "tweets" on Twitter about their opinion on a certain topic, it's there for the whole world to see. A lot of times, these people receive criticism for a lack of good judgment for posting a controversial view.
It's important though that public space be used in a effective way. Learning through difference in school and being able to converse with classmates about ideas is essential.
Public Discourse Ethics
Chapter 6 deals with the topic of public discourse ethics, and is defined in the book as "conversation about ideas in civic/community contexts marked by diversity of perspectives requiring thoughtful public engagement" (pg.100). It is an idea that encourages listening, agreement, and contention among an audience in the public arena. In addition to its definition, the authors also include the topics of public decision making and differentiation of public and private space. Public decision making is the standard of which we use to evaluate whether or not decisions are right or wrong within the public arena. Differing ideas, theories, and actions shape our conception of proper decision making in public. The differentiation of public and private space is the "identification of two spheres of life that shape and inform each other by maintaining their separate identities" (pg.100). It is important to know how to approach certain situations, whether they are in private, or among hundreds of other people.
A very concrete example the book offers pertaining to public decision making is the internet. The internet is perhaps the world's largest public space, and the right and wrong within its space must be acknowledged. Especially now that we are in the age of social media, and sharing thoughts and opinions on the internet has become more popular than ever. Posts that are looked at as right or wrong can provoke many different responses from others, and a standard of behavior over social media is formed. When posting on the internet, people tend to lose any sort of filter and will say terrible things that should not ever be said in public space, although the original poster has the ultimate control of what they do and do not say on the internet. An example that really stood out to me pertaining to the differentiation of public and private space was the mentioning of cell phone conversations in public. This is where what should be private is often made public, as a conversation that should most likely take place alone, is now being held in public, and is hard to be ignored by others. Some people may not be afraid to say whatever they feel on the phone, no matter where they are, while others may filter what they say, and important information is not shared in the conversation. Overall, public discourse is an interesting concept that must be navigated carefully by all.
A very concrete example the book offers pertaining to public decision making is the internet. The internet is perhaps the world's largest public space, and the right and wrong within its space must be acknowledged. Especially now that we are in the age of social media, and sharing thoughts and opinions on the internet has become more popular than ever. Posts that are looked at as right or wrong can provoke many different responses from others, and a standard of behavior over social media is formed. When posting on the internet, people tend to lose any sort of filter and will say terrible things that should not ever be said in public space, although the original poster has the ultimate control of what they do and do not say on the internet. An example that really stood out to me pertaining to the differentiation of public and private space was the mentioning of cell phone conversations in public. This is where what should be private is often made public, as a conversation that should most likely take place alone, is now being held in public, and is hard to be ignored by others. Some people may not be afraid to say whatever they feel on the phone, no matter where they are, while others may filter what they say, and important information is not shared in the conversation. Overall, public discourse is an interesting concept that must be navigated carefully by all.
Discourse ethics boundaries
Chapter six talks about public discourse ethics, and ideas such as keeping the public a safe place for discourse, and I entirely agree: to a point.
I genuinely, with all my heart, believe that we should keep public spaces a safe place for us to be who we are, to talk, to have disagreements and to hopefully come to some manner of conclusion that makes most parties happy. The only way we can really do that is to keep the public safe so we can keep dialogue open. That may mean things like when talking about sexual assault or other issues that may trigger PTSD (post traumatic stress disorder) is to put trigger warnings on things, and coming up with ground rules for discussing sensitive issues.
However- my big thing, can we go too far in trying to make the public a safe place for discourse? If we put too many rules on discourse, try to make it too safe for too many people, is it possible to stifle it?
I genuinely, with all my heart, believe that we should keep public spaces a safe place for us to be who we are, to talk, to have disagreements and to hopefully come to some manner of conclusion that makes most parties happy. The only way we can really do that is to keep the public safe so we can keep dialogue open. That may mean things like when talking about sexual assault or other issues that may trigger PTSD (post traumatic stress disorder) is to put trigger warnings on things, and coming up with ground rules for discussing sensitive issues.
However- my big thing, can we go too far in trying to make the public a safe place for discourse? If we put too many rules on discourse, try to make it too safe for too many people, is it possible to stifle it?
The Public as a Safe Place
One concept I found interesting in chapter six was "The Public as Sacred Space". On page 109 the book states that public should be a space that is honored and valued, which I personally agree with. Without the public being upheld like a sacred place, our society is would not be safe enough for differences. We are entitled to protecting this domain and keeping it as diverse as possible in order to learn more from one another.
One example I can give of this concept is The first Amendment of the Constitution. The first Amendment directly affects the concept of the public being sacred space by ensuring that we are free to verbally express ourselves however we feel necessary. This Amendment values individual point of views and promotes a flow of diverse personalities to express themselves. The book states that we protect the diversity in the public domain, which the first amendment ensures.
One example I can give of this concept is The first Amendment of the Constitution. The first Amendment directly affects the concept of the public being sacred space by ensuring that we are free to verbally express ourselves however we feel necessary. This Amendment values individual point of views and promotes a flow of diverse personalities to express themselves. The book states that we protect the diversity in the public domain, which the first amendment ensures.
public disclosure
Ohh boy. This topic is one of my favorites - public and private space. Public discourse is great in the way that ideas are shared, opinions are re/shaped, and engages individuals with one another (as described on pages 101-102). We would not be who we are today without the influence of public disclosure, since other people help us determine what path we should go in life. This is not only in a physical-type situation, it can also be found online through the infamous social media sites such as Facebook, Twitter, Instagram etc.
So, who/what exactly determines what is public and private? Analyzing this, I can see that technology has hugely influenced public disclosure. When I was avid on social media I found countless social media accounts posting things I would consider "private". For example, I did not find the need to post feelings about a current relationship debacle in hopes of gaining attention or getting feedback on what to do. About a year ago I was sick of not feeling any privacy anymore, knowing thousands of my "friends" on Facebook were clicking through my profile learning about this image I portrayed online. I deleted pretty much all of my social media accounts, and let me say - Best. Thing. Ever.
So, who/what exactly determines what is public and private? Analyzing this, I can see that technology has hugely influenced public disclosure. When I was avid on social media I found countless social media accounts posting things I would consider "private". For example, I did not find the need to post feelings about a current relationship debacle in hopes of gaining attention or getting feedback on what to do. About a year ago I was sick of not feeling any privacy anymore, knowing thousands of my "friends" on Facebook were clicking through my profile learning about this image I portrayed online. I deleted pretty much all of my social media accounts, and let me say - Best. Thing. Ever.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)