Communication Theory - Week 06 - Langsdorg - The Malleable Mind
Traditional communication models and information flows do not mirror the nature of the human mind.
Computer models store information with linear and hierarchal perfection, but without emotion or relational context. The human mind files information in association with events and perceptions as influenced by external information. In addition, memories are malleable as they continually shift from the effects of additional information, new interpretations and changing expectations of the psyche.
Traditional philosophy considers sure knowledge as ideas acquired through learning and reflection. Rhetoric is the use of ideas without knowledge. It seems reasonable that people with sure knowledge would have more credibility than people using rhetoric. However, this isn’t the case. Langsdorf accounts for this inconsistency with hermeneutic knowing. Hermeneutic knowing, in conjunction with Heidegger, illuminates a type of knowledge that is formed by history, regulated by culture and informed by personal perspectives. It is the middle ground that uses ideas with some level knowledge with meaningful context.
Langsdorf’s theories on Hermeneutic Knowing demonstrate an active psyche that is continually re-evaluating its existence relative to changes in its environment, history, culture, and expectations. The computer stores and retrieves data, but the human mind stores and retrieves experiences relative to its cumulative set of experiences.
I pondered a bit on why humans don’t have perfect memories. On the surface, it would seem like a flaw, but I don’t think so. People value perfect memories, but that doesn’t mean nature does. Perfect memories would mean we remember the good and bad equally. The passage of time, and a little forgetfulness, allows us to let go of terrible events. I’m wondering if we would have the ability to forgive if we remember the wrongs against us with perfect clarity. There wouldn’t be a grieving process; there would just be an unending grief we would carry.
I’m thinking that our imperfections are design essentials for the purposes of growth and adaptation.
References
Langsdorf, L. (2007) Callicles’ parlor: Revisiting the Gorgias after dwelling with Gadamar. . In P.A. Arneson. Perspectives on Philosophy of Communication (pp. 45-60). West Lafayette, IN: Purdue University Press.
Radford, G. P. (2005). On the Philosophy of Communication. South Bank, Vic., Australia: Thomson Wadsworth.
Computer models store information with linear and hierarchal perfection, but without emotion or relational context. The human mind files information in association with events and perceptions as influenced by external information. In addition, memories are malleable as they continually shift from the effects of additional information, new interpretations and changing expectations of the psyche.
Traditional philosophy considers sure knowledge as ideas acquired through learning and reflection. Rhetoric is the use of ideas without knowledge. It seems reasonable that people with sure knowledge would have more credibility than people using rhetoric. However, this isn’t the case. Langsdorf accounts for this inconsistency with hermeneutic knowing. Hermeneutic knowing, in conjunction with Heidegger, illuminates a type of knowledge that is formed by history, regulated by culture and informed by personal perspectives. It is the middle ground that uses ideas with some level knowledge with meaningful context.
Langsdorf’s theories on Hermeneutic Knowing demonstrate an active psyche that is continually re-evaluating its existence relative to changes in its environment, history, culture, and expectations. The computer stores and retrieves data, but the human mind stores and retrieves experiences relative to its cumulative set of experiences.
I pondered a bit on why humans don’t have perfect memories. On the surface, it would seem like a flaw, but I don’t think so. People value perfect memories, but that doesn’t mean nature does. Perfect memories would mean we remember the good and bad equally. The passage of time, and a little forgetfulness, allows us to let go of terrible events. I’m wondering if we would have the ability to forgive if we remember the wrongs against us with perfect clarity. There wouldn’t be a grieving process; there would just be an unending grief we would carry.
I’m thinking that our imperfections are design essentials for the purposes of growth and adaptation.
References
Langsdorf, L. (2007) Callicles’ parlor: Revisiting the Gorgias after dwelling with Gadamar. . In P.A. Arneson. Perspectives on Philosophy of Communication (pp. 45-60). West Lafayette, IN: Purdue University Press.
Radford, G. P. (2005). On the Philosophy of Communication. South Bank, Vic., Australia: Thomson Wadsworth.
Comments
Post a Comment