The act of communication, whether in the form of visual, oral, or written, is an essential to everyday life among human beings. In the article, Chandler discusses and argues the flaws of the model created by Claude Shannon and Warren Weaver. Even though their particular model did contribute to computer science and assisted communication engineers, he proposes that the model cannot be applied to human communication. I agree with the arguments he presented; humans are very much the opposite of computers. We do not simply send and receive information. We interpret them as well and it is these interpretations that enable us to communicate in response. Anything and everything said or written is never one-dimensional. As a result, the Shannon and Weaver model of communication cannot hold true for all the complicated aspects there is in human communication. Chandler also discusses medium, content, meaning, and information, among other aspects. One of the most important points he made in the article was one in which he argues against the point that communication is linear. Part of being human is our ability to respond to others. It seems as if the model assumes we are like machines. Now, one can understand why even the simplest idea can be misunderstood and misinterpreted.
Yours,
Karoline Lee
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment