Symbolic communication can be defined as the things that we have given a special meaning and as such represent a particular idea. Further symbolic communication can be interpreted as a language that is dependent upon the use of symbols created for the sole purpose of achieving exactitude.
A look at the use of symbolic language in the text “How Language Shapes Thought” by Lera Boroditsky. Lera progress idea of symbolic communication in her article based on the arguments that the language of thought is mostly the same type of language used by humans or the instance as form of language used in making utterances. The reason one would like to consider the use of symbolic communication is the posit that language of thought which could be considered as symbolic at most is the same type as the language uttered in simple communications but there is considerable difference when it comes to symbolic communication and the art of instance which could be explained with an example of someone thinking in Russian but using the symbolist nature of language to speak Mandarin (Manning, 1988). The concept seems very sophisticated but in essence what is represented in Lera Boroditsky, “How language shapes Thought” on the issue of using symbols to communicate can be captured from the girl in the text who clearly identifies the north direction as rightly is in the compass. The girl captures the use of symbolism to identify a direction based on her native language and how it places importance in the use of absolute cardinal direct which heavily symbolic rather than use of relative spatial symbols (Leeuwen, 2006).
Double bind
Double bind is considered as an emotionally distressful dilemma in communication where an individual captures two or more conflicting messages and where one message negates the other message. This kind of situation giving a successful response to one of the message results in ultimately a failed response to the other message as result you can never be right regardless of the response given. The concept of double bind in communication is one where you be damned if do as well damned if don’t. In the year preceding the 21st century double bind statements were a characteristic that helped define a schizophrenogenic parent. According to the theory that was used to define a schizophrenogenic parent was that the parent would give conflicting messages this messages would in essence place a child of that kind of a parent a no win situation which would in retrospect would only work to cause anxiety and confusion (Kearney, 2014). Double mind as seen from the class texts and external source are important in some quarters like the Buddhist society where double binds situations are considered or rather perceived as importance aspects in the quest for enlightenment. From the complexities in human communication, it is utterly impossible to live without ever having experienced double bind. The daily interactions in language can cause the rise of a double bind situation. Double binds are a cause of delicate sensitivity in many people, mostly those who have suffered from the situation in the past. From the various sources learnt in class and source on the internet double binds are a great source of confusion and utter disorientation in some instance where the individuals placed in this situation are concerned. Communication can never be effective especially when it is disoriented by used double binds. The concept of double bind is one that can be further expounded from watching the Nora Bateson film about her famous dad’s work, “An Ecology of Mind”. The ideology of double bind is considered destructive to fragile language and communication systems and as such the independence between communication and language in natural sense is deprived.
Mimesis / Mimetic Desire.
Mimesis is defined as imitation or rather representation of the real world using art or literature and in other quarters as the deliberate imitation of a particular behavior of an individual or a group of people (Gallix, 2010).
According Girard, a French historian, philosopher and literally critic and whose work belonged to the tradition of anthropological philosophy, on the concept of mimetic desire. The fundamental concept of mimetic desire, according to the observation and studies of the French philosopher human nature represented the greatest mimetic capacity. That means simply that the human species has the greatest imitation ability. From the studies imitation is indeed the greatest form of learning and this particular fact is supported by neuroscience (Girard, 2016). A study by a group neuroscientist found out that human neutral structure promotes the art imitation in very proficient manner. However according to Girard imitation gives little attention to the fact that we are actually imitating other people’s desires and dependent on how it happens it could be a cause of rivalries and conflicts. The French philosopher makes a distinction between imitation and mimesis describing the former as a positive aspect of representing someone’s behavior while the later according to Girard, implies the negative aspect of possible rivalry. From his text it is important to note that if imitation is understood to refer to mimicry, then mimesis should refer to the deeper, mostly instinctive response that humans have to each other.
Metaphysical desire
According the works of Girard mimetic desire may grow to a greater degree such that a person exhibiting mimetic desire eventually wants to be her mediator. At times people do not just want a product for instance for only it inherent qualities but would rather be the someone who actually promote the product. Girard note that a person may desire something as a part of a larger desire that at one point will be her mediator. The French social science philosopher calls the desire to someone else as metaphysical desire. Girard notes in his works that acquisitive desires lead to a metaphysical desire in the long run and the original subject of desire later becomes just a token of for representation of the larger desire (Levinas, 1979).
Internal mediation.
When discussing this concept, there is the mediator and the mediated person and on the concept of internal mediation the two are no longer separated abysmally and as such belong to the same world. They actually resemble each other to the point that they end up sharing similar desires. But sharing of the same desires brings rivalry and as a result become fierce competitors coupled with the fact that they already resemble each other (Thought, 2016).
In internal mediation the subject imitates the model’s desires. In the views of Girard this literally theme is a perfect portrait of human nature. The theme of internal mediation is a major theme in most of the modern novels. People will want imitate other desires but eventually this will cause rivalries.
References
Gallix, A. (2010). In theory: Mimetic desire. the Guardian. Retrieved 12 April 2016, from http://www.theguardian.com/books/booksblog/2010/feb/08/theory-mimetic-desire
Girard, R. (2016). Girard, Rene | Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Iep.utm.edu. Retrieved 12 April 2016, from http://www.iep.utm.edu/girard/
Kearney, R. (2004). Debates in continental philosophy: Conversations with contemporary thinkers. New York: Fordham University Press.
Leeuwen, J. . (2006). Symbolic communication in late medieval towns. Leuven: Leuven Univ. Press
Levinas, E. (1979). Totality and Infinity: An Essay on Exteriority. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands.
Manning, P. K. (1988). Symbolic communication: Signifying calls and the police response. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.
Thought, L. (2016). Language Does Not Shape Thought. Science 2.0. Retrieved 12 April 2016, from http://www.science20.com/eye_brainstorm/blog/language_does_not_shape_thought-112409
