Post 1467, Day 194 of 2015
- 1,655 days since I started this blog -
- 1,655 days since I started this blog -
Daily Comment
Communication between humans is a tricky thing. At its most basic, say between mother and infant, it is perfectly simple, non-verbal, and complete.
Add a layer of symbolism (I'm looking at you, human languages) and things get more complex. Now internal monolog (aka, consciousness, aka, 'thinking') modifies all received messages.
Add a layer of indirection (media), and you are playing a game of 'telephone' and the message sent has little chance of being the message received.
Digitize that, completely removing the non-verbal human envelope that is the basis of all interpersonal communications (remember the mother-and-infant communication?) and all that's left is a shout into the void and the hope that some small part of the communication is received, by who and how it was intended.
I haven't seen many examples of that working in practice. Good communication involves, at a minimum, a code mutually understood between transmitter and receiver. In humans, this involves more than one sense - and some complexity even when only one sense is involved.
Think about it. In a conversation between two interested people (interested in communicating with each other), each spoken word has inflection (audio), expression (visual), gesture (tactile and visual), and a context involving all the senses, including the sense of smell and space-time. None of these parts of the message is available if the word(s) get reduced to, say words on a page.
A good writer will provide this context, and describe the sensory part of the communication as well, but the conversation becomes inefficient, and requires an increased commitment on the part of the receiver to decode.
My guess is, more often than not, that decoding is inaccurate.
My personal experience with new modes of interpersonal communication like emails, IM-ing, group messages and texting has led to me disliking, to a greater or lesser degree, all digital communication. The misunderstandings pile up, and soon, thanks to other factors, the original message is not only lost, but replaced with something with no resemblance at all to the original attempt. Sometimes it is funny, but I've seen people hurt and injured due to this.
I am not exempting this blog, either (I knew you were waiting to bring that into the conversation) (LOL). Smartass! But you have to remember, this blog is mostly masturbatory - just me talking to myself in a small public room. If you walk into that room, I expect you to be non-judgmental. No, really, stop laughing now!
There's nothing wrong with it. It's natural.
The masturbating part, anyway.
Food and Diet Section
Today's Weight: 210.0 lbs
Today's Weight: 210.0 lbs
Previous Weight (7/10): 209.4 lbs
Day Net Loss/Gain: + 0.6 lbs
Diet Comment
Weekend weight-gain, not too bad.Diet Comment
Quest bars (after my tri-yearly fasting blood work appointment).
Lunch
 |
| Salmon salad (Wild Alaska pink salmon, celery, mayonnaise) on baby kale, baby spinach, chard and cole slaw mix. |
A Quest bar.
Dinner
Roast beef, Dubliner cheese, cole slaw and celery with home-made mayonnaise.
Snack
Quest bars.
Liquid Intake
Espressos: 3; Coffee: 24 oz.; Water: 86+ oz.;
Please leave a comment if you visit my blog. Thank you!
i disagree. Masturbation is natural. Exhibitionism is not from nature, but from an ego that is artificially inflated through lawful conditioning, conditioned education and thought resulting in the false division of the unity and complete intrarelatedness of the present. Communication is happening all the time. No begiinning and no end. Initiation of a "communication" is not only unneccesary and redundent, but is divisive and reinforces the time/space illusion of self and other. Words are only useful when they address "what is", not "what we think". Thought is limited by time and space. Understanding is immediate, no time, no space. One doesn't attempt to communicate, one is in communication.
ReplyDelete- LightLoveCompassion -
p.s.
DeleteNobody just walks into that room without being asked or invited. Masturbation is private and personal. Doing it in public is exhibitionism. Who wants to watch?
- LoveLightCompassion -
pps.
DeleteListen, the silence is sounding.
Love
ppps.
DeleteSince when is consciousness a.k.a. thinking?
- Light -
Starting from the top:
DeleteIf masturbation is natural, it is natural. No matter where or when. Put it on display, and it is still the same, only perceived differently by the audience. That is how I see my writing in this blog. I write without an audience - they can't see what I've written until it is published. It is the act of publishing that starts the communication. In this metaphor, that would be after I've 'finished'. With or without an audience for my writing, I enjoy riffing on my thoughts. Audience response is another thing, but I like that, too. But again, it is the act of publishing that exposes the 'private' to the public.
Your definition of communication is similar to the ideal that I started with - mother-infant. This Comment is about that being degraded to the point of it not happening, and why.
I walk into rooms without being invited. So, not 'nobody'. I think you probably do, as well. Of course, this doesn't apply to all rooms, all times. And usually, I knock first, but don't always wait for a reply. I'm like that. In this case, the publication is a 'public invitation'. I don't expect anybody to respond, but certainly enjoy it when someone does.
I rarely listen to silence, but when I do, it is because of the sounds surrounding it.
Consciousness/thinking may be something I just invented. Or it may be a thing. I think they're hard to separate on this plane.
Enjoy yourself. We'll meet when we all wake up from dreaming.
Delete- CompassionLoveLight -