Tuesday, June 14, 2011
Communicative action and speech acts
12. Communicative action and speech acts. According to Jurgen Habermas, communicative action entails a presupposition of language and speech utterance as medium and means to achieve understanding. It seems as though everything uttered is then to attain a goal of bridging understanding between two parties or in the jargonic sense, the subjective and the external and social world. Thus Habermas proposes that in communication, the speaker will (or in fact put more succinctly, all speech acts presupposes) claim for truth of his statement (and its propositional content); that his speech act is in tandem with the normative context which makes it a legitimate speech claim; truthfulness or sincerity for the manifestation of his intention and subjective experience. In speaking, actors will presuppose a seeking for consensus and truth (as though it is the nature of all humans) and measure it against some truth, rightness and sincerity. All speech acts hence sought inherently to appeal to a portending relation towards truth, rightness and sincerity in all three objective, social and subjective worlds against the backdrop of a culturally ingrained understanding.
Instant mass culture
Summary of the five instant misunderstandings. The only possible way to maintain a valuable life unto death is to love the universality of knowledge. Epistemic irresponsibility will manifest its ramifications later on in life when we are beset by one's no longer fortifiable ignorance giving way to our putrid contemptible soul - that which is only predicated conjunctively with spurious habits.
The most deceiving of which is the chimera of instantaneity. I live in an era where everyone demands of others, instant progress, instant gratification, instant respect, instant love and instant solutions. But all instantaneity faces its innate simultaneous pitfalls called most perceptibly, instant failure. Progress is itself connoted with a qualifying time-span that requires gradual understanding and development. Hence, any sort of instant progress is delusional. For all man who tried to derive instant sexual gratification and thinks he can, will face requital for his betrayal towards the moral institution of monogamy. The reprisal is that later on in life, he will lose the trust of his peers and face utter helplessness from estrangement and his inability to withhold his salacious desires that has little to no dais in society and to himself. One who demands instant respect from others through dogmatism will find that in a reasoning society, his or her ways coincide with no justifiable legitimation. Charisma is still appreciated but must be modulated and mentored by a reasonable and knowledgeable mind because any other wise, it will only become heresies in any institution. Instant love is perhaps the most surreptitiously flawed notion. It claims that one can maintain a steadfast relationship unto death by virtue of saying “I do” in the holy church and the registrar of marriage. The most evident counter-argument to this is the soaring number of divorcees itself! If indeed any extraneous force can buttress a relationship then, perhaps humans may only need to be unthinking and unevolving automatons. Since Hegel’s theory of the dialectical progress of history, we know that there is no linear and much less, instant progress. All history is contrived and all evolution as in Darwin’s landmark theory involved liberal amounts of time. More theories have to be written to lambast the mass media’s protrusion of the concept of instantaneity for they have made philosophers look bad for taking far too long and the layman for being so efficacious. The next time a person tells you he is efficient, think about the quality of his soul for efficiency usually means provincialism and complacency.
The most deceiving of which is the chimera of instantaneity. I live in an era where everyone demands of others, instant progress, instant gratification, instant respect, instant love and instant solutions. But all instantaneity faces its innate simultaneous pitfalls called most perceptibly, instant failure. Progress is itself connoted with a qualifying time-span that requires gradual understanding and development. Hence, any sort of instant progress is delusional. For all man who tried to derive instant sexual gratification and thinks he can, will face requital for his betrayal towards the moral institution of monogamy. The reprisal is that later on in life, he will lose the trust of his peers and face utter helplessness from estrangement and his inability to withhold his salacious desires that has little to no dais in society and to himself. One who demands instant respect from others through dogmatism will find that in a reasoning society, his or her ways coincide with no justifiable legitimation. Charisma is still appreciated but must be modulated and mentored by a reasonable and knowledgeable mind because any other wise, it will only become heresies in any institution. Instant love is perhaps the most surreptitiously flawed notion. It claims that one can maintain a steadfast relationship unto death by virtue of saying “I do” in the holy church and the registrar of marriage. The most evident counter-argument to this is the soaring number of divorcees itself! If indeed any extraneous force can buttress a relationship then, perhaps humans may only need to be unthinking and unevolving automatons. Since Hegel’s theory of the dialectical progress of history, we know that there is no linear and much less, instant progress. All history is contrived and all evolution as in Darwin’s landmark theory involved liberal amounts of time. More theories have to be written to lambast the mass media’s protrusion of the concept of instantaneity for they have made philosophers look bad for taking far too long and the layman for being so efficacious. The next time a person tells you he is efficient, think about the quality of his soul for efficiency usually means provincialism and complacency.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)