Free Critical Analysis Essay Sample

The current dilemma in communication is aggravated by the electronic mediums which act as an interface between the recipient and the source. In fact, the case is so worse that the chance of recognizing such items like artificial signs is all sublimed at the discretion of one party in the dialogue that is not a guarantee that they will realize them. Thomas Reid has a view that is consistent with many people who feel that serious communication is anchored on volatile grounds of grammar. Rules in grammar set principles that will help communications to make sense to either party in a dialog. That is why the author says “all the reasoning and arguments must come from first principles and the sole reason that we must accept them is the fact that, we are constituted that way, and we cannot help, but assent to it that way.” When people are not able to stick to first principles in communications, the chances of multiple interpretations or even no communication at all in their emails or messages becomes apparent (Chapter1 P6).
It is thus true to state that electronic and current means of communication are a hindrance to the growth and advancement of communication and argumentative skills among the current generation.
The rules of communicating among the latest interfaces cast shadows in the perennial rules of communication and grammar, and this has even gone as far as ensuring that the insight of the communicator is not easy to determine. The motive behind every communication can be realized early enough by judging natural signs as body language, tone of the speaker, as well as, the mood of that person. Whereas some people find communication via electronic media more comfortable, it is clear that not everyone can pick up a conversation and express themselves without feeling uneasy, and so seeking solace in electronic means of communications will dampen someone’s communication skills. The fact that established rules help to govern how we express ourselves ought to be upon the users to uphold them; otherwise, there will be nothing to prove by breaking the rules in the language. Most people when communicating find comfort in writing their own things to suit their misconception without minding the reader of the same content. From the article, there is a confession that if one does not know how far apart his or her hands are, he or she cannot happen to know how long an object touching him or her can be. Therefore, if somebody is ignorant of the harm digital communication is causing him or her, then, he or she will commit a mistake without knowing. In places where rules stand out as in health institution and even financial institutions, whatever one communicate must reflect a properly bred learner who is cognizant of the rules of that language (Chapter5 P38). In the law as well, every item to the effect of a comma, changes the meaning of the whole statement and as such, they have to be careful with their communications whether oral or written. To avoid misleading and sometimes null statements in communication, it is imperative among the communicators to uphold the rules of the language although that is met with compromise.
While living with the fact that some of the challenges in the current communication are simply problems of one’s own making, especially if they take to their concern the nature of communications that occur on the same platform, one will appreciate that these problems will stick around for some time before they can be corrected unless individuals take the initiative to correct them at a personal level of communication. The natural signs in communication in turn become dominated by habits, as opposed to interactive reaction to consent. The instincts of every human being in communication reflects their response in dialog, and as earlier dissected, the difference between hardness and feeling is based on a relative approach to ideology. The most common technology, which contravenes the rules of grammar, is “twitter” in which case limits a person to communicate in 140 characters. Such kinds of conditions will force the person to communicate in some slang or coded language. The compromise also extends to the fact that, with that limit, it is certainly not enough to reveal the insight and intentions of a person for the recipient to judge. Quite often, it is difficult to gage the seriousness or rather, mood of the person communicating by just reading through what they post, without having to encounter them physically. From the article, the interest of adult in a communication is what they want to express. However, the interest of the child in learning is in the sound (Chapter5 P34). A person can communicate while in extreme mood and the same is not noted by the recipient and especially if that is not the nature of that person. It is also worth noting that, how we orient ourselves to communicate influences the nature of our communications so that, if we are exposed to communications via means that are not bound by rules, we risk weakening the communications.
Occasionally, natural signs make the receiver confident of their perception of what their counterparts are speaking about. However, with technology it is somewhat harder to decipher symbols in a dialogue by just reading them without having a feel of the tone and body language if the communication was one on one. The fact that online communication is never and has never been subject to scrutiny has made many users of the same technology adopt a “be my own judge” syndrome in themselves so that, they need their conscience alone to ratify the mistakes they commit in the course of communication. The conceptions of the mind may be justifiable under certain circumstances; however, they may never be unilaterally acceptable by a larger group of people and as such, when the same conception is reflected in communication, it discredits the entire communication. The other challenge with electronic media is the fact that, it is a free environment where no one is bothered with whatever you post as part of your communications. In fact, it is considerably the only environment where new unjustified language use comes up and is adopted without the consent that it will erode the principles of that language. One of the characters mentioned in the article, Zeno tried to demonstrate the fact that, motion was impossible by claiming that there was no difference between right and wrong, and that is exactly the notion that will be created through electronic communication where rules are hardly appreciated. The other illustration used is that a rock surface does not mean absolute hardness and thus communication must have some natural signs alongside it. This just helps to highlight the fact that the challenges that our emotions undergo are synonymous to the challenges that our communications undergo (Chapter1 P8).
The fact that technology interface has the effect of autocorrect application that sometimes intercept the intended meaning in a sentence is also another reason to appreciate that the natural signs in communication tend to fade with technology. In a natural setting where communications happen in a one on one interface, a lot of factors come into play that inform our choice of words and even our general appeal before the recipient. To avoid embarrassment to both of us, people will try to take care of their body language in order not to leave an otherwise impression of them. The absence of how we feel and even express ourselves is seen as substandard truth about our true personality in the sense that, interfaced communications is not reflective of true character. This is just a course to highlight the fact that not everyone can communicate freely with everyone, and, therefore, interfacing communication with technology may only help the immediate needs as opposed to promoting explorative communication. Official communications via emails, depending on the environment in which the same is done will have to abide by the rules although, in some cases, where the intention is sufficiently pronounced, the rules of grammar may pass unnoticed. An environment where figures are used to shorten the unnecessary wording, and ensure the right message is delivered in brief. The underlying weakness is that this orientation of communication nurtures people into a position where one is not able to point the finger where there is a mistake instead waits for a mistake to be accepted and admitted, and people learn to live up with it.
With the technology interfacing the course of our communications, according to Thomas Reid our minds become conditioned such that what would occasionally be considered unnatural sign is treated as natural to our minds. The major challenge with the latest communication is the fact that the rules of grammar are hardly highlighted in the construction of sentences and instead of pointing them out, the receiver of the message tries to dig out the intended meaning in the message. According to the article, “the existence of ideas and impressions is not supported by reason anymore as opposed to the case for the existence of minds and beliefs” (Chapter1 P7). This highlights the fact that people are not conscious with the rules of communication. The complacence is considerably a dangerous root that once started will spread uncontrollably poking holes in the whole of spoken communication, and as Thomas Reid puts in this article “as being weak and imprudent, the concession is dangerous for it is just a fact about belief and that if you leave any root it will spread” (Chapter1 P5). Perhaps, what is a major concern is the cumulative effect of laxity arising from people in a chain of communication who are in one way, or another laid back in character and are somewhat afraid to take up the role of communicating in fluent language that is bound with rules.
The other weakness that tends to make the user vulnerable when using online communication is the fact that the said communications are almost straightforward with the exception of an official letter communication for a job. Unlike magazines that communicate to a wider public and or even particular target group, online communications occur between people who are either friend of workmates of close business dealers.
This confined, and limited conversation enables the two people to interact along certain latitudes that to them is comfortable enough than going on a public rally. This recipe is a setback to anyone pursuing a chance to grow their communication skills and the level of threat is bigger. In a nutshell, the course for growing communication has in the recent past faced a challenge with the handset based networking applications that saw a shift from verbal communication to digital communication. This communication, has, however, been subject to a negative influence in the name of creativity. In this sense, unrecognized abbreviations take the course, and before you realize it is a mode of communication among many users in that channel. The realization of how the same effect is infiltrating down the generation is what has raised an alarm enough to warrant a check on the digital means of communication. Human behavior and by extension communication is conditioned by the type of environment they are exposed to so that, when they are influenced by whatever habits that are considered healthy by an individual they will grow to know that they are normal unless they change the environment (Chapter5 P33).