Psychological Model of Communication

The interesting topic that arose from the readings was the Psychological model of communication. It has been enlightening to me in the sense of its characteristics. The fact that the psychological model is learned through exposure has given me the ability to persevere through many of the obstacles that has plagued me in my life, from those being discriminatory or stereotypical. The psychological model of communication confronts a topic that has surfaced as influential in all eras of time within the human existence. Faulty communication occurs often in the public sphere and this is important because it influences the mentality of people’s intent and way of thinking. I feel that each human should be educated thoroughly in this area of study in communication before high school. I feel that this would be as effective as cloning millions of Martin Luther King’s, Cesar Chavez’s, and Marshal Thurgood’s.

Pragmatic Perspective

In the terms a pragmatic perspective communication is not a patterned interaction. Pragmatists argue that any model of reality, be it scientific, historic, or philosophical, is unverifiable in an absolute sense. The pragmatic perspective claims that objects in the world has no essence or a nature, and can be usefully described in many ways. This is not to say that people cannot be wrong in their assertions or descriptions. But, the pragmatic perspective denies that it is useful to talk about being "right" in an absolute sense. Communication can be related to a game in the sense that one can debate as a game. From a pragmatic perspective debating is a social competition of conditions stated to guide a belief. For pragmatists, it is enough for a description to be coherent and useful. If it satisfies these criteria, it may then also be called true. Nevertheless, communication differs from a game in the sense that a winner can never own the truth or an outcome. As new information comes into the sphere of truth, it may change. Therefore, no outcome is certain and concrete. Whereas, a game, you are striving towards an outcome pre-determined. Truth is simply that which is found to be useful to believe in a given occasion.

The Social Contructionist Perspective

In a very real way, the self is socially constructed. All aspects of a person is shaped and framed through communication, for communication guides the consciousness, mind and self of every human. People show themselves to be locals, by co-coordinating their actions in ways that are deemed locally appropriate and natural in a given environment. Communication is viewed as forming persons and worlds. The social constructionist perspective dictates what is “real,” in other words, what is “of existence” in a given social sphere. Language in most instances is thought of as standing in for, or representing, how things are to be. Reality is what we say it is. If we say it is different, then it is different. If I say in the morning, that I am a man, then that is what I am; if I then say in the afternoon that I am a woman, then I am. This caricature is both right and wrong. At the level of principle it is right; it is through ascribing meanings to ourselves and the surrounding world that we can understand and act in the world, and in that sense both ourselves and our world are the meanings we ascribe to them. Meanings are contingent and therefore changeable and, if they change, the subject and the surrounding world also change, making available other possibilities for thinking and acting. But, in a given situation, most meanings are relatively stable and individual subjects have only limited possibilities for manipulating them. Changes in meaning ascriptions are collective social processes

Test Trial

Hello Professor,

This is my new post attempt! :)