{[ promptMessage ]}

Bookmark it

{[ promptMessage ]}

COMM2400 Chapter 6

COMM2400 Chapter 6 - Unit 6 Developing Free and Open...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Unit 6 Developing Free and Open Communication A Vocabulary of Motives We have choices in our basic orientations to the world and others. Here we develop a vocabulary for talking about communication that draws attention to its political intent and consequence. We need new words to distinguish kinds of conversations. We have a lot of words to talk about strategy but not non-strategic communication. Our most basic orientation to the world Motives are interactional motifs—a kind of intentionality in a way of interacting that an individual embodies or is called into. The question—“What is good communication?—is a central concern to everyday life and democratic institutions. Since the answer has consequences for what we become as human beings as well as life and death consequences (in conflict and distribution of resources) in the way we live together, it is a moral question. Moral questions like this are not just a matter of opinions. Moral knowledge is a form of knowing. Morality isn’t just a form of opinion, a developed understanding (a from of knowning. Each one of these gives us a contestable space. In what manner should we talk about these differences. We have to live in the same world, we are pluralistic and independent. How do we talk to each other of how we have different rules and orders in society. The claim we are working with right now, despite the fact saying I vote for power because I have a lot of it. There are moral consequences of that choice. We understand that, don’t have to be convinced. Not the question can I win, but what do we want to be as people? Self interest is self perpetuated Not only is this a moral question, we already have a moral standard. We are different in many ways but we share a similar moral standard. Bring to surface the morality we already have. What is this morality. How do we bring it to the surface and what are the consequences.
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Rather than assuming an answer to the question of morality we can ask, “How would we prefer people talk about the things about which we might disagree?” Would it be fair argument as long as power is present? People need to be sincere. If ideas are totally formed by someone else, is this a fair argument? Basic concept of reciprocity For a proposal to be real, it has to be sincere. Moral base of communication: based on what we already accept as essential to be able to communicate. May be strategic at times, but they are going to be parasitic on the fundamental aspect of what we consider socially acceptable With this, rather than a substantive morality based outside of communication we are looking for a moral process of discussion based in communication processes.
Background image of page 2
Image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

{[ snackBarMessage ]}