Communication ethics is an area that is defined by a lot of differences. Not only is it hard to make one solid definition, but it is difficult to argue and discuss if one is being unethical. In order for us to be effective communicators, it is essential that we learn about the other's opinions and the learn about the discernment between the two (p. 210). The pragmatic view is really important in ethics because it gives both people a way to express their own views of what the "good" is, and then be able to bounce back and forth off of one another. This leads to another important factor of crisis communication. This concept recognizes just how different people are when it comes to communicating, and that since people's behaviors are different, then they are going to respond differently. When the public sphere is breached or interrupted, it is extremely beneficial for people to negotiate what their views of the good are (p. 214).
As time goes on, there aren't as many specific goods, and there are many more views of what the good actually is. So, this makes it even more difficult to decipher. Understanding narrative theory helps us to understand our own backgrounds and others backgrounds in order to understand just why we act the way we act. Or where our thoughts of the good comes from (p. 215). There must be a willingness to learn about another, and without that, there isn't anything to be gained. The other will become upset, and the conversation will have gone backwards.
One example I have of this is from my catholic high school. My religion teacher was very, very conservative. In one of our classes, he told us that being gay was a sin, and that one should just try to be straight and try to rid their thoughts out of their brain about the same sex that they were attracted to. This upset many students in my class. But, some of the students started personally attacking him instead of having a conversation with him that made them see where he was coming from. Had they known that he had grown up in a very traditional home, they would have been able to be more empathetic towards him, but instead, the conversation completely escalated. The good wasn't defined by either parties, so the conversation continued to escalate.
All in all, that is just one example that shows if both people aren't able to listen to the other, then neither good will be present.
Your example is good. I like how you emphasized negotiation and learning from each other. Those are key aspects of communication ethics. Because there are so many varying ideas of the good it is very important for people to learn the Other' perspective in order to understand. This is where crisis communication comes in. Understanding and learning from each other are crucial to effective communication.
ReplyDelete