rhetorical post

Back in the year 1980 a man by the name of S.F. Scudder brought forward the statement that all living beings existing on the planet communicate.

I don’t know if it is due to my innate love of words or my considerable study in the field of communication, but this concept engages me right to my very core.

Communication is the essence of life. It is integral to our existence and contains the ability to bring meaning to anything and everything we encounter.

When you allow yourself to think about all the different approaches humans, plants, animals, organisms – the list goes on – use to interact with each other, it is really quite mind blowing. Verbal and non-verbal exchanges between different people, within different relationships and under different circumstances can cause the communication between two individuals to fluctuate immensely.

Now, think about communication as a whole. It is not only comprised of spoken and unspoken words, the physical act of writing a letter or picking up the phone to make a collect call. It is everything you bring forth as a unique, multidimensional person, that shapes the communicative experience you share with another being. It is the transfer of information from one living entity to another, and when you ponder the broad spectrum of communication itself, there is no surprise that life is full of misunderstandings.

However, these inevitable and continual misunderstandings that are woven together to make up our lives — whether we notice them or not — result in learned adaptability and resiliency. To be able to work through our differences and sort out our varying perceptions; I believe that shows through in the form of character development and strengthened relationships.

Taking the time and energy to find common ground and strive for mutual respect is something you will never regret, no matter what situation you find yourself in.

During one of my communication courses early on in my degree we learned about Communication Theory – a concept we circled back to throughout the semester. Something that appears as simple and matter-of-fact; opening your mouth to talk to another person wasn’t officially developed in the form of a communication model until 1951 when a handful of men decided to put it down in writing.

One of them, by the name of Robert T. Craig stated that “communication is a process of expression, interaction, and influence, in which the behavior of humans or other complex organisms expresses psychological mechanisms, states, and traits, and through interaction with similar expressions of other individuals, produces a range of cognitive, emotional, and behavioural effects (Craig, 1999, p 143).”

The communication theory goes on to describe the elements of communication, including the communicators (sender and receiver), the message, noise, feedback, context and the channel. It sounds straightforward when laid out step by step, yet communication, I have learned, is one of the most complex and confusing things to navigate in life. Especially interpersonal communication – not just understanding someone but being able to relate to them as well.

As I go on further to explain the intricacies of this theory, you will see just how many layers are involved in such a seemingly simple model.

First, the message: the initial idea, which I might point out, can never be completely raw or untouched. Many things play into the message itself including facial expressions, tone of voice, body language, hand gestures, verbal and non-verbal cues. They all offer information, some more obvious than others, for example, the person’s interests or attitudes.

Second, the noise: any sort of distortion that affects the message while it is being sent. This can be anything from a loud semi truck rumbling by, complicated jargon, noticeable boredom, a glitch in your cell phone, disengaged body language, cultural differences, etc. The noise inadvertently causes some sort of change in what is received from what is sent.

Third, the feedback: the way the person receiving the message responds to it. This describes how accurately the original message is interpreted and in turn, affects the message that is sent back.

Fourth, the context: this includes the emotional climate, the expectations of both people involved, where the communicative event takes place, the social and political environments – anything that assists in setting the context.

Last, the channel: the medium in which the message is transmitted from point A to point B. Face to face, over the telephone, etc.

It is apparent how many things play into the way we engage with one another, and how easily the original meaning can end up completely twisted. Throw in the added aspect of technology-based communication where you lose the ability to see and hear the other person’s delivery or explanation, and it is not surprising that conversations and intentions are taken the wrong way or else completely lacking contextual buoyancy.

Although this framework appears rudimentary, and was revisited countlessly throughout the completion of my undergrad, it still serves to send my mind wandering. I am often thinking about the way I understand others and the way I understand myself, and I take pride in my ability to figure out the reason behind a personal feeling or reaction. However, there are times this is not attainable, and there are times when I have found myself terribly mistaken – when I have subconsciously assumed that whoever I am communicating with views the world the same way I do.

Of course, no one views the world exactly the same way. Wilbur Schramm exuded overwhelming wisdom when he said that “there is no meaning in a message except what people put into it.” We will each attach meaning differently since we all walk down different paths, and we all do things differently with the lemons our lives give us.

Look at the plethora of internal and external factors that we bring along to the forefront of every interaction, each time we engage with someone. There will be things we are aware of, and hundreds of other things that have the potential to never make themselves known. With human communication, we are allowing ourselves to be susceptible to misinterpretation, but also inviting others into our realm of vulnerability. To connect, to discuss, to learn and to grow.

And that is a very complicated and challenging arena to stand in.

However, communication is not just about being aware of your own habits and what you bring forth when you talk to someone. It is about reaching a cognizance of the person whom you have entered a shared exchange with in order to have the ability to maintain healthy and fulfilling relationships.

I guess what I’m trying to bring to your attention is how incredibly elaborate communication is. Whenever you allow another person in, you surrender your control over the outcome of that experience. However, my hope is that by attempting to be aware of the many facets that come along with each person you converse with (utterly unique to them), it can help you meet someone on common ground and push you to re-evaluate the way you participate while in communication with others.

A