The ideology of communication: Post-structuralism and the limits of communication (original) (raw)
Related papers
Some Foundational Conceptions of Communication: Revising and Expanding the Traditions of Thought
Empedocles: European Journal for the Philosophy of Communication, 2013
Keywords communication theory communication studies traditions of thought DIsCussIoN Peter simonson university of Colorado, Boulder Leonarda García-Jiménez state university of Murcia Johan siebers university of Central Lancashire robert t. craiG university of Colorado some foundational conceptions of communication: revising and expanding the traditions of thought abstract This work presents and defines three meanings of communication taking into account some of the traditions of thought that founded our field of study. These three conceptions are: communication as an architectonic art; communication as a social force;
The Two Sciences of Communication in Philosophical Context
Two claims are at stake for a science of communication. This essay brings into focus the philosophical distinctions between the human science of communication and the social science of communication. Social science is argued to be the dominant paradigm in mainstream communication inquiry in the United States. Its underlying basis is information theory. Communicology is a human science that differs from social science in that it focuses not on the message but rather the cultural-semiotic constraints on embodied phenomenological experience. This is a unique human science approach. The grounds for comparison are located in the history of these contrasting views and in their problematic concerns. American pragmatism and social psychology are depicted as analogous to European philosophy and the Geisteswissenschaften. As this essay argues, the human science of embodied discourse is historically rooted in semiotics and phenomenology and lead to a synthesis in contemporary communicology. Communicology is distinguished from cultural studies, and a vision for the future discipline is advanced.
Students of communication and related studies (journalism, media studies, development communication, etc.) study a plethora of theories coming from various social science disciplines for their slight or extensive reference to communication. One common observation among students of these theories is their seeming disconnect and lack of relationship with one another. This observation that communication is not yet a coherent field is proof of the fact that communication lacks a metatheory. Constructing communication's metatheory, also known as metanarrative or grand theory, however, though welcome, runs contrary to post-structuralism, today's celebrated philosophical rage that frowns on such metatheory formulations. Thus, in the context of the current philosophical milieu, communication's metatheory ends up being constructed and deconstructed at the same time. This paper analyzes the issue of unifying communication theories as the answer to the lack of coherence of communication studies. It holds that metatheory development may not necessarily make communication coherent as it did other disciplines. Communication is shaping up to be a discipline defined by the philosophical theses of post-structuralism, which frowns on metatheory formulation and sees in discourse the validity of post-structuralist studies. Communication as a metadiscourse can explore the discourses in Philippine society and help enrich them.
This course is an introduction to the theory of communication as a distinct discipline. We can define the field of communication loosely as concerned with studying the processes by which people interactively create, sustain, and manage meaning. In this sense, language, science, the media, technology, culture, society, and philosophy are a few of the many areas in which communication studies is relevant. We begin this course by mapping the origins of the field, beginning with media effects and theories of communication, then move on to policy, theories of technology, critical theory etc., and finish with the philosophy of language and the key debates between structuralism/poststructuralism.
This essay reconstructs communication theory as a dialogical-dialectical field according to two principles: the constitutive model of communication as a metamode1 and theory as metadiscursive practice. The essay argues that all communication theories are mutually relevant when addressed to a practical lifeworld in which "communication" is already a richly meaningful term. Each tradition of communication theory derives from and appeals rhetorically to certain commonplace beliefs about communication while challenging other beliefs. The complementarities and tensions among traditions generate a theoretical metadiscourse that intersects with and potentially informs the ongoing practical metadiscourse in society. In a tentative scheme of the field, rhetorical, semiotic, phenomenological, cybernetic, sociopsychological, sociocultural, and critical traditions of communication theory are distinguished by characteristic ways of defining communication and problems of communication, metadiscursive vocabularies, and metadiscursive commonplaces that they appeal to and challenge. Topoi for argumentation across traditions are suggested and implications for theoretical work and disciplinary practice in the field are considered.
2 Theories and models of communication: foundations and heritage
Theories and Models of Communication, 2013
This chapter charts the historical influences on the theories and models that shaped the communication discipline. This chapter illustrates the importance of U.S. and European scholars from not only the beginnings of the communication discipline, but those who were pre-eminent in other academic disciplines such as sociology, psychology, political science and journalism, as well as examining emerging scholarship from Asia that focuses on understanding cultural differences through communication theories. The chapter traces the foundations and heritage of the communication from five perspectives: (1) communication as shaper of public opinion; (2) communication as language use; (3) communication as information transmission;
Introduction to Philosophical Profiles in the Theory of Communication
2012
Philosophical Profiles in the Theory of Communicationis the first book to draw systematic attention to the theme of communication in twentieth-century academic philosophy. It covers a broad range of philosophical perspectives on communication, including those from analytic philosophy, pragmatism, critical theory, phenomenology, hermeneutics, feminism, psychoanalysis, systems theory, and more. What emerges is a vital, long-neglected story about the theme of communication in late modern academic philosophy. Each chapter features a "profile" of a particular philosophical figure, with a brief intellectual biography, an overview of that figure's contribution to communication theory, and a critical assessment of the significance of that contribution. The clear and accessible organization of the volume makes it ideal for courses in both philosophy and communication studies.
Book on Philosophy of Communication
Emmaus, 2020
Introduction Philosophy is interesting but communication is equally interesting. Both, philosophy and communication are subjects that will always be remembered. Having studied both, we decided to undertake this study, in order to look at the connection and relationship between the two disciplines, which is fascinating. That is why we undertook this venture and this effort to write this book. In this book, we will look at the different aspects that characterise the study of the Philosophy of Communication, mainly; we will establish the sense of a philosophy of communication, and look at the link between modernity, post modernity and globalisation. We will also explore the phenomenological understanding and problematical nature of communication; the truth of communication and then we will study the anthropology of communication. In the final analysis, we will seek to look at the limits and the other side of communication. This book is aimed at helping students who venture into the study of the Philosophy of Communication, which is usually a university course. This book would serve as a manual to help in delineating the main themes of the Philosophy of Communication but it would also help in helping the man and woman of today to appreciate the value and importance of communication when studied from a philosophical context. We have in this book tried, as much as possible, to use terminology that is simplified, deliberately avoiding the difficult philosophical jargons. We hope that our expressions and the treatment of the subject in general will offer us important themes and explanations that can help us to appreciate this discipline. Dr. Fr. Charles Ndhlovu-Mkhalirachiuta