I found chapter 17 very interesting. The portion of the chapter called Ethical Reflection: Habermas’ Discourse Ethics discussed a very important variable in the functional perspective on group decision making. The fact that Habermas’s approach looks at culture in an after the fact manner discourages my belief of the group decision making perspective. Griffin (2008) states, “Habermas assumes that people within a given culture or community can pretty much agree on the good they want to accomplish, and overtime they’ve built up practical wisdom on how to achieve it” (p. 231). This statement seems true but the problem I see is when the verbal factor of communication in a group setting gets underway some cultures may not take the same venue in communicating.
I have experienced this first hand when I was co-chair of accreditation for student support services. We had weekly meetings and there were some members who would barely speak in the meetings. As co-chair I tried to encourage them to engage in the conversation because their ideas needed to be heard. I realize that their cultural background and upbringing were factors of their lack of participation. The only way that I could get them to engage is if I met with them one on one and directly asked them their opinion. I saw that it was hard for them to open up to me. The fact that I had to take them out of the group setting to communicate didn’t seem like we were functioning well as group. We did get the report done and I took with it experience and lessons that I will carry out throughout my career.
[Watch *HD*] In the Heart of the Sea Full Movie
-
[Watch *HD*] In the Heart of the Sea (2015 Full Movie
[image: In the Heart of the Sea]
Based on the incredible true story that inspired Moby Dick
[image:...
6 years ago
2 comments:
I can definitely see what you are saying in regards to whether Griffin's statement about Habermas' assumption holds true. I think the assumption "within a given culture or community" is assuming of one culture or community and may not reflect a diverse community of as many cultures as we see today. I have taken an Intercultural communications course and also witnessed first hand how different some cultures are in respects to communicating or voicing their thoughts. I can imagine how difficult it could be working across cultures, but it is definitely a good experience/skill set to learn.
I agree that having to take certain people out and away from the group in order to get good dialogue and communication going, seems to contradict the point of group communication. Culture is one of many factors that can hinder or affect communication. There are so many other factors like perception, aesthetics, ethics, religion, personal interests and more that affect communication in and out of small groups. In my global climate change class, we have been talking a lot about values and a hierarchy of values. If someone places culture at the top of their hierarchy of values, then they are more likely than not to use communication scripts or norms akin to their cultural upbringing. Whereas someone that places that lower on their priorities in a value set, may not take cultural norms into consideration when in a small group setting. Many times we make these decisions subconsciously, not even knowing why we are communicating a certain way. It takes a lot of self-awareness to be able to pinpoint your hierarchy of values, and then to apply those to the way you communicate with others. I feel very comfortable communicating in large and small groups, and it may be because I was socialized and raised in a household with many people around. Therefor, I am used to talking in front of people and communicating with many people at one time. I also have been involved in many clubs, plays, and small group meetings, so this consistency and repetition of small group communication in my life has made me more comfortable with it. I think one of the most important parts of communication studies is being able to see not only the differences, but also the similarities between communicators; and then being able to use those similarities to find common ground and symmetry within interactions.
Post a Comment