Skip to main content

Philosophy and Technology, What Gives?

Barry Brummett wrote an essay that attempted to define terms. He grappled with and presented three possible interpretations of the phrase "rhetoric is epistemic." He tells us that this phrase, depending on the lens through which it is understood, can mean any one or all of the following things:

1) Communication is the only way we can arrive at Knowledge or a single, universal Truth.
2) Truths are multiple and complex, and communication or discourse is the only way we can understand some of them.
3) Our Truth is entire dependent on communication: the Truth is malleable and changes as we change how we communicate about it.

But, like, why does this matter? 

In a class entitled Writing in a Digital Age, why would we care about how we create or interpret truth or whatever?

Because that's what we do every day, always, every time we communicate ever.

We're living in a pretty dense and lush historical moment; we are at the highest height of communication that we've ever historical been. That's major. As the world draws nearer to the point of total human interconnectedness via the internet, how will our beliefs and truths be altered? How will our language be altered? How will our altered language change the way we perceive truth?

As I write this post, I am aware that, like, seven people are going to look at it. BUT! it could be seen by billions of people because of the ubiquity of the internet as a communicative platform. That's why this matters. Because our understanding of the epistemology of rhetoric (I tend to ally myself more with the third interpretation) will shape-- is shaping-- the way that we communicate and the result of that communication. New words, new definitions, and new understandings all contribute to the way we perceive ourselves and our world. In what ways will we be able to communicate reflexively about ourselves as humans when every human has a voice in a constant, all-inclusive conversation?

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Extended Human

Says Marshall McLuhan: "All media are extensions of some human faculty– psychic or physical." With this, the co-creator of 1967's experimental book on the philosophy of communication, The Medium is the Massage , provides some interesting food for thought. On the following two pages he makes claims about objects and the human body parts from which they extend. The wheel from the foot, the book from the eye, clothing from the skin. And this is a pretty compelling concept: The wheel is like an exo-foot, a re-imagining of the foot that preforms nearly the same function but is many times and in many ways more efficient. Written text provides us vision of people and worlds we cannot see with our eyes alone. Clothing... well, you get the point. I could not have seen Spike Jonze's Her  at a more appropriate time. First of all: excellent film. The movie's about a guy that falls in love with a computer. But the best part is that almost no-one thinks that's ...

Here Comes Everybody

Clay Shirky, the author of Here Comes Everybody , writes, "When we change the way we communicate, we change society." This is the legend on the map. The cypher.  As I'm sitting in a library, I see form influenced by function. Book shelves are lined so that people may pass between them, scanning titles and call numbers. Each shelf has a long, rectangular space in which many books can be placed. Each book is a rectangle folded around flat, rectangular pages. The form or shape of each of these structured objects is a direct result of its function. Things are shaped the way they are because of the task they preform. Chairs must have a surface that keeps our butts off the ground, and their shape falls victim to that aspect of their function.  This opposite true of communication. The form of our communication shapes the function. For instance: a book is a medium of communication. The form of it, the pages and spine, lead to its function as shelf matter. (That's not ...