A Justice Site
Mirror Sites:
CSUDH - Habermas - UWP
California State University, Dominguez Hills
University of Wisconsin, Parkside
Soka University Japan - Transcend Art and Peace
Created: April 26, 2002
Latest Update: April 26, 2002
jeannecurran@habermas.org
takata@uwp.edu
Speaker/Writer
Copyright: Jeanne Curran and Susan R. Takata and Individaul Authors, April 2002.
"Fair use" encouraged.Based on a discussion on a list:Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2002
From: Thomas McDonald
Subject: SpeakerWriters and the New TribalismIn this passage from his essay "Toward a Critique of the Theory of Meaning," Habermas explicates a functional scheme for language that can integrate the referential (object-centered), propositional (subject-centered) and formal (language-centered) theories of semantic meaning:This will get finished as soon as I can find a minute. jeanne"Expressions that are employed communicatively serve to express the intentions (or experiences) of a speaker, to represent states of affairs (or something the speaker encounters in the world), and to establish relations with an addressee. The three aspects of a *speaker* coming to and understanding with *another person* about *something* are reflected therein."*
With some of the discussion here recently it occurred to me that this list of ours is most poorly suited for communicating the subjective/intentional dimension of speech (perhaps to be improved by body-language visibility when video-conferencing becomes available).
This is in part the old speech vs. writing problem, where although a speaker is intersubjectively available to a hearer, his/her writing becomes but a collection of objects (signs) to be reconstructed.
Yet this problem brings to light a new reality. There is a kind of convergence taking place with the roles of speaker and writer within electronic forums such as this.
In this context there is a closing of the gap *in time* between writer and reader (writing becoming more like speaking) which paradoxically can also be seen as a widening of the gap *in space* between speaker and hearer (speaking becoming more like writing).
This can be taken in many directions.. but one thing it confirms for me is Marshall McLuhan's thesis that electronic media are having the effect of making us again into an oral culture, which could help to explain some of the new tribalism.
I personally welcome many aspects of oral culture, but I do also believe it presents a challenge to the trans-national social unity sought by modernism that we shouldn't give up on (hence my interest in Habermas).
I believe an important question is whether this new culture collapses back into a pre-abstracting/metaphysical (pre-universalizing and so tribal warring) mode or becomes a historically-aware and hence truly 'post-' rather than 'pre-' metaphysical oral culture.
I'd be interested in anyone's feedback on these ideas.
Regards,
Tom
*(Jurgen Habermas, Postmetaphysical Thinking, MIT Press, 1993, p.58)
Tom,
I'm very much interested in the speaker/writer role in academic and public discourse.
Tom: "This is in part the old speech vs. writing problem, where although a speaker is intersubjectively available to a hearer, his/her writing becomes but a collection of objects (signs) to be reconstructed."In academic discourse in urban areas, even when I try, I find it hard to prod my students to write. A colleague and I have tried myriad approaches, and discovered that many of our students will and do begin to write as they begin to trust. Since that trust, which seems to be key for them in beginning to use the written word to extend our discussions, I suspect there's a little more than the collapsing of the time gap going on here. We've been saving their communications for a qualitative analysis. I'm planning to put the communications into a database. I'm looking for the most effective ways to guide community members who care about public discourse into developing the skills for such discourse, and I figure our students in local commuter colleges offer a good working group.
I've pursued this speaker/writer issue primarily because many of my students missed critical thinking practice along with writing practice in the educational system. I find it easier to teach the critical thinking, especially when dealing with large numbers, through writing. Written communication gives me concrete data for analysis. Oral discussions are much harder to get into a database. But ease with talking about issues seems to precede writing about them, yet we don't provide adequate practice for either speaking out in a critical sense or for transferring those skills to written argument. I think we have to if civil discourse is going to work.
jeanne