Defining Communication

Communication is a fascinating subject because it involves a major part of our existence that we put to use consciously or unconsciously at all times. The immense power that words have in society is only matched by other equally important forms of communication such as body gestures, sounds, or a plain mean look. Trying not to communicate at all can be as powerful as any single word. Whether it is for a personal or professional use, I believe an overall understanding of communication can lead to a better understanding of the people around you.

Choosing a definition for communication is not easy but one that I feel is closely in line with my beliefs is: “Communication is the process whereby people assign meanings to stimuli in order to make sense of the world” (Trenholm, 2008). I like this definition because it is simple and effective. Defining something as broad as communication takes a simple answer because you could really go on forever. As humans, we (generally) have five senses that absorb the world around us. Our senses act both ways as communicators. But without meaning to the stimuli we encounter there is really no meaning at all to the world. Communication is an evolving idea that takes on different forms that we decide. Understanding it at a base level will go a long way towards enabling us to be effective communicators.

References
Trenholm, S. (2008). Thinking through communication. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Gay Marriage Debate

Despite the fact that gays are clearly becoming more accepted on a daily basis in this country, gay rights is still a relatively new concept. That is not to say that being gay is a new concept or fad, but the ‘coming out of America’ and the demands of equality that come with it have really just begun to develop on such a national level. People are opening their minds and accepting the gay lifestyle more and more. According to Bidstrup (2009), nearly seventy per cent of Americans support gay rights which essentially promotes equal opportunities and equal access to the things that all other Americans are privy to. However, almost the same amount of people opposes legalizing gay marriages. How is that possible? How can a majority of people agree that homosexuals deserve equal protection from their country and in the same breath wish to restrict a very basic right? How can this one word, marriage, create so much polar opposite thinking within one person’s head?

The short answer is people are scared. Just as when the world was flat. Whether they think something is right or not, sometimes it is easier to just continue on living on a flat world. Change represents fear. People know gays should have the right to marry, but what if it changes everything? What if there is an unforeseen circumstance? Maybe we should just put it off a little longer. If only we had some proof that everything will be OK.

Well there is proof because, surprisingly, other countries in the world have to deal with the same issues as us and some of them actually take action in a timely manner. According to Bidstrup (2009), gay marriage has been legal in Denmark since 1989 and in most of Scandinavia for just about as long. They’re still on the map aren’t they? In fact some of gay marriage’s harshest critics, the clergy, have fully accepted that it has been good for the country. Seventy-two per cent of the Danish clergy were opposed to allowing gay marriage at the time it became legal. A poll taken six years later revealed that eighty-nine per cent of the Danish clergy admitted the law is good and had positive effects on their society including reduced suicides, less spread of sexually transmitted diseases, and less promiscuity and infidelity within the gay community (Bidstrup, 2009). Instead of the straw that breaks the world’s back, it almost seems like the allowance of gay marriage may actually be a step closer to a utopia on Earth.

References
Bidstrup, S. (2009, June 3). Gay marriage, the arguments and the motives. Retrieved June 7, 2009, from http://www.bidstrup.com/marriage.htm

Mangaging Emotions

 A huge part of a person’s identity and general make-up is their emotions and how they handle them. As I mentioned before, organizations are comprised of diverse personalities and that includes a wide range of emotional behavior. People’s emotions can get in the way of productivity because feelings can hurt, conflicts can arise and people can be silenced due to fear or spite. Emotions are what also keep us in check. They can keep us honest, ethical, or sympathetic to others. Emotions are often irrational because you can’t help how you feel. It is a sense that you get and there is no guarantee that extended thought and reason will change that. However, recognizing your emotions and managing your emotional intelligence is the key to open discussion and honest communication. Emotional feelings are different for everyone but they exist in everyone. Therefore, effective communication involves knowing your own emotions and understanding the emotions of those around you.

Hansen & Weis (2008) believe that in order for an organization to get the most from its workforce, they “need(s) to have authentic, differentiated individuals showing up as themselves – telling truths, saying what they mean, facilitating open communication, and implementing authentic data flow”. This alludes to having an identity and being comfortable expressing it in the workplace. However, this authentic self can only be brought out through self-awareness of emotional intelligence. Hanson & Weis go on to describe the “opposing forces” we face as individuals every day of having our own thoughts, beliefs, and feelings (conviction); and being connected socially to the people around us (connection) (2008). Finding the balance between your convictions and your connections is the essence of emotional intelligence. It is the constant task of being both separate as an individual and cooperative as a member of a group. This cannot be done without having a handle on your own emotions while recognizing the emotions of those around you.

References
Hanson, L. & Weis, W. (2008). The use of training groups (T-Groups) in raising self and social awareness and enhancing emotionally intelligent behaviors. Allied Academic International Conference. Academy of Organizational Culture, Communications and Conflict. Proceedings. Retrieved April 27, 2009, from Proquest Database.

Challenging Norms

Everyone is born into a time and place on Earth. The setting for which your time is spent is based on the evolution of your environment up until your birth and the continuation of such as your life plays out. It is not just the turn from monkey into man that represents evolutionary change. It also encompasses changes in ideals, challenging of norms, and striving towards understanding. Being ignorant to truths is not necessarily a shameful thing. While it is true that the world has always been round, it existed as flat in the collective consciousness for generations. No harm, no foul. Generations later had the luxury of having the truth as knowledge and all of the other findings that continue to be aided by it. However, a shameful act would be to torture and imprison the person that had the insight and human curiosity to challenge the old belief. That is what allegedly happened to Galileo Galilei in 1633 by the order of Pope Urban VIII who, for whatever ideological or political reasoning, would not accept the change (The New York Times, 1878).

Galileo had the courage to challenge an idea so grand and vital to the understanding of life itself: the ground we walk on; the sky we gaze at; the forces that keep us grounded. So what is the big deal about marriage? Is the concept of two people getting hitched as scary and sacred a concept as having the idea of our world almost literally flipped upside down? In our time and place, there is a fight over who has the right to wed. That is not to say there is a fight over who is intelligent enough, who has proved themselves to be mature enough, or even who has established a long enough relationship to take it to the marriage level. The battle is being fought on a more basic level than that. The fight is about whether legally practicing homosexuals should be allowed to marry their partners in the same way that legal practicing heterosexuals can. And while Galileo had to endure physical torture for his personal obligation to science and understanding, the homosexual community today faces the torture of being denied a basic civil right.

References
The New York Times, (1878, March 24). Was Galileo tortured? Retrieved June 9, 2009, from http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=9F0CE4D6113FE63BBC4C51DF B5668383669FDE

Persuasion, Manipulation, & Seduction

Much of human communication involves attempts to influence. It is done verbally and non-verbally; consciously and unconsciously; honestly and deceitfully. Some people may be swayed with reason and logic or by emotions and character. There is no doubt that the power to persuade is a coveted tool for anyone regardless of how they wish to use it. However, beyond simple persuasion are other acts of influence that are just as powerful. The three terms, persuasion, manipulation, and seduction are sometimes used interchangeable when describing influential behavior. However, there are subtle and blatant differences between the three concepts. While using anyone of these methods could yield the same result for an influencer, there are clear differences in the way they are done.

Persuasion

Persuasion is the act of influencing others, who are conscious of the intent, through communication. That is they are conscious that attempted influencing is taking place. Also it is under the assumed umbrella of free will meaning that there is no form of duress or outside pressure involved that would force influence. Persuasion is an honest approach to influence in the context that there is an acknowledgment of attempt.

Manipulation

While persuasion is an act that takes place between at least two conscious parties, manipulation happens when the side being influenced is not aware of it. Our brain is setup to learn a vast amount of normalcy in life which can be executed unconsciously. There are certain stereotypes, frames, and schemes encoded in humans that make up their cultural programming (Codoban, 2006). That is a human is programmed over time to execute everyday decisions mindlessly based on the expected behavior of themselves and others. Manipulation takes place when a conscious person triggers an automatic response from an unconscious thinker.

Seduction

The art of seduction, as it is often described, is a kin to persuasion as its intent to influence is known. What sets it apart, however, is the influencer (seducer) is setup to be the object of desire that will complete the missing parts of audience so that they may be complete (Codoban, 2006). Seduction is also a kin to manipulation as is draws upon social programming and natural responses of people. As the term is used mostly in the relationships of a man and a woman (or sexual preference), there are many programmed and natural responses that take place when a seducer successfully makes themselves the object of another’s desire.

Sometimes the lines may be blurred when influencing takes place. There are definite moral stigmas attached to each of these influencing techniques. While persuasion has a broad connotation of simple attempts of influence to any or all audiences, manipulation and seduction have specific undertones of being immoral. While manipulation has the power to be an effective technique for wrong doing, it also happens every day when a parent tricks their child into acting or thinking in the right manner. And while seduction can build sexual relationships based on false intentions, at its core it may just be a desire to be desired by someone. It is important to realize that a lot of our constant communication is spent influencing others or being influenced by others. The choice is yours of how open you are to different influences and how you choose to influence others.

References
Codoban, A. (2006). From persuasion to manipulation and seduction. JSRI. 14(151 to 158). Retrieved July 29, 2009, from http://www.jsri.ro/new/?download=jsri_14_articol_14_aurel_codoban.pdf