False Memories - W4/D3

            One of the most interesting concepts that I came across in chapter 3 is the idea of false memory. As I read the section, I thought about all the instances of possible false memories in my life. Often times I find myself trying to distinguish between my short term memories.. did this event occur in real life or did it occur in just a dream? I thought that the example story the reading gave was extremely intriguing. I have watched plenty of biographies and news stories that explain how those who are being interrogated for a crime will falsely confess to it because that circumstances under which they are in are so stressful. After reading on this concept, it makes me wonder if they were victims of false memory as well. I just find it so interesting that our minds can play tricks on us like this. And it makes me wonder how many of my childhood “memories” are just simple fabrications. Inception! 

Gender and Communication- W4/ D2

I absolutely agree that men as well as women you language differently. The book did a wonderful job at explaining the reasons as to why men and women communicate the way they do. The reason that I most agreed with was gender roles effects on how males and females communicate.

From birth, from the moment we find out the sex of the baby, I feel that society places standards to which the baby must fit into. For instance, its okay for boys to have rough physical play and play with guns, but it is not okay for a boy to be overly sensitive or to cry. Having this rule or expectation placed on the boy at such a young age will inevitably affect the communication style he will come to know and use. By saying he should not cry, maybe this will affect how he expresses his feelings as a man in the future. The same would go for females. If a young girl is told to play with dolls and taught to care and love her barbies.. she may grow into a young lady who enjoys expressing her emotions and socializing with others.

Another aspect from the reading that I completely agree with is sexist language and how that too affects how genders communicate. Different cultures place different meanings to words. And I appreciated the example of words the books uses: girls = innocents and less responsible; whereas women could mean more responsible or ladylike. 

Perceptions of Others - WK 4/ D1

I actually think that this question is quite difficult to answer and I found myself really reflecting on my own life and how I perceive others. Is it really possible to perceive others without in some way judging or categorizing them? In my mind, no we cannot. We are always using some sort of schemata or utilizing some part of our social construct to recognize people, remember them, figure them out, understand them better, etc. The way in which we judge isn’t even always so drastic, we may just perceive a person we just met by categorizing them simply by gender or by race. And I don't think that doing things like that necessarily leads to stereotyping or assumptions about the person, we simply just judge/recognize them through such things. On the other hand, I believe it is quite easy to make our judgments more fair: 1) do not stereotype, 2) have an open mind, 3) always be willing to learn more and to retrieve more information.

Attitude W3/D1

When public speaking or communicating in general our goal is often to persuade a person to view things in and to agree with your perspective. This idea is also known as changing ones attitude. Attitudes are basically our mental structures that cause us to act in certain ways. In the reading we learn that attitudes can affect the way we think, feel, and behave. There are three dimensions to the concept of attitude: 1) cognitive dimension, 2) affective dimension, and 3) behavioral dimension. Cognitive dimension consists of everything we know or believe about an issue. In my opinion, cognitive dimension is affect by our social constructionist perspective, a concept we learned in chapter two. Affect dimension consists of emotional reactions to the object or situation. And behavioral dimension consists of what we think should be done. You see many public speakers, especially those who are running for office, trying to change their audiences attitudes on a subject. I think that if the speakers has a credible, positive, and intelligent attitude to begin with and if they make good use of Aristotle’s three rhetorics, they should have no problem changing anyones attitude. 

Building Ethos W3/D2

The first admirable speaker that came to my mind was Ellen Degeneres. Ellen encompasses amazing communication skills. Ellen is well liked, funny, relatable, and just an all around good-natured person. And probably one of her best characteristics is that she is down to earth. I believe that out of the three rhetorics, ethos is probably her strongest suit. Ellen could possibly build her ethos in terms of attractiveness, power, and credibility, by doing the following: In terms of power, Ellen most often plays up her good character and I think this is why so many people like her; because she has an amazing ethos. To strengthen her power I think she should work on better distributing her power through aristoles three rhetorics. She should put more effort into exposing and using her pathos and logos when she speaks. Through gaining credibility she will also be more trustworthy and credible to her audience thus affecting and strengthening her relationship with her audience; her audience with find her more attractive .And in terms of credibility, I believe that Ellen is doing wonderfully as it is. She remains to be a good person who avoids conflict and works hard. 

Best/Worst Speaker W3/D1

One of the best speakers/communicators that I know personally is my sister Nikki. There are several traits that contribute to her way of communicating: 1) She is open minded, 2) she tries her best to remain unbiased and to see all perspectives of a situation, 3) the style of the speech (the words she choices, her “voice”), 4) she speaks with confidence, and lastly, 4) she is a very attentive listener. As stated in this chapter being a good listener is key in any type of interaction or communication. And I believe that Nikki’s amazing listening skills has a great affect on all of her other speaking attributes. For example, Nikki tries her best to listen to all points of a situation without any biases or prejudgments. This in turn, gives her a better perspective on things.

I can’t pinpoint anyone in particular who I think is a horrible speaker, but I do know what traits a horrible speaker has; the number one trait being terrible listening skills.  I strongly dislike anyone who is closed minded and unwilling to hear anyone else’s opinion or understand anyone else’s perspective. Being unwilling to listen makes two way communication (or any type of communication for that matter) almost impossible because only one person is transmitting messages without there being any receiving or feedback. 

Symbols W2/D3

One of the more interesting concepts from the reading, for me, was the idea of symbols and using symbols as a means of communication and interaction. This concept stood out for me particularly because it overlapped with a discussion I recently had in my ChAD 60 class on symbolic communication and representation. Symbols are a more abstract way of communicating. It is the innate and unique human ability to attach meaning to such things like signs, pictures, and physical objects, among other things. I would even consider things like American Sign Language as a use of symbols to communicate. When I first read on the concept it made me think about slaves and how many of their master forbade them to speak to one another and so slaves developed a means of communication through their bodies. Many of you may know this as “step” or “stepping”. I just think the concept altogether is so interesting and even quite advanced. 

Pragmatic Model WK 2/ D1

When first going over the readings section on the pragmatic model I definitely agreed with it’s comparison to the game of chess. And I do believe that there are elements of communication that has patterned interaction. In fact, as I read on about the pragmatic model I got into thinking about my own experiences with communication and its patterns. I specifically thought about my relationships with people: my parents, my friends, my girlfriend, my siblings, and how each of these different relationships is like a separate game. They have different rules, different standards, and most importantly different reactions and interactions. For example, I know through experience I know that particular communicated messages on my behalf will receive certain reactions from the particular person I communicated to. If I cry (message 1), it will receive the question “What’s wrong”(reaction 1) in return. Not only that, but there are specific ways in which one communicates to receive specific solicited reactions. For instance, If I cry in a pitiful manner, I want people to react in a way that shows that they feel bad for me. My communication solicits attention. With that said, I guess communication isn’t like a game, in that you can never fully predict what reactions you will get. You can assume the reactions through past experiences, but you can always be surprised with the turn out.

Social Constructionish WK 2/ D1

The social constructionist perspective believes that one does not directly experience the world, but instead experiences the world through the influence of their culture. It is stated in this model that we construct our world through communication, specially communication between our culture and its constructs and ourselves. For example, say a small southern Christian community young boy is told that homosexuals (for instance) are horrible people with bad intentions. This idea is drilled into his heads from the time he can even process information to the time he graduates high school and gets ready for college. He gets into UCLA and moves to the big city where he is bound to run into more than just one gay man or woman. Instead of experience these people himself, instead of truly getting to know them enough to form his own opinion, he automatically hates homosexuals because of what he has been brought up to believe around him. The messages communicated to him as a young child has created a false world for him. I guess the best way I can describe the social constructionist model is that it’s like wearing rose colored glasses. You see only what you want to see, or at least what you’ve been conditioned too. This can sway either way.. it can bring happiness to ones life or the opposite.

Style - WK1 / D3

Although I found all of Cicero’s Five Canons of Rhetoric interesting, the concept of  “style” stood out the most. In short, style is the language one uses to present their ideas. It is said that classical writers believed language should be clear, lively, and appropriate for the audience. This is something that I completely agree with. Using just the right words and approach towards the audience is vital in gaining both their attention and respect. For example, it would be inappropriate to write a letter to the Dean of Admissions using the kind of language you would use to right a text to your best friend. Another good example, is when and when not to use slang. If you wanted to receive a good grade on a class term paper it would not be smart to use slang. Aristotle’s ethos, logos, and pathos is also a part of the concept of style. These three persuasion rhetorics directly relates to three (for lack of better words) sub-concepts of style: plain style, middle style, and vigorous style. Plain style is built by ethos; it is where you would convince the audience of your good character by using good sense. Middle style is built by logos. And lastly, Vigorous style is based on pathos; where you try to hit an emotional/personal cord with your audience.