metonymy4u

Communication is an interesting phenomenon, isn’t it? The ways in which animals try to change the behaviors of other animals? Sometimes they engage the acoustic blast technique–talking, yelling, bellowing, grunting, trumpeting, singing, panting, barking, whistling, calling, crying, chirping. Sometimes though they emit something a bit less “definitive”: the facial expression, the hand gesture, the foot twirl, the head tilt, the neck swivel, or the nose wiggle. Each one has the potential for expressing so much, and each one can go so terribly wrong. We often get indignant at what we perceive as the “message” and the “sender.” As if these were more than just events. As if information were out there somewhere in the world to be apprehended by a sentient mind. One of the illusions of the western magic show we call “rationality” is the notion that human brains can adopt a special relation to events, and thereby establish (or un-cover) something like meaning. Philosophers love to believe that humans (and sometimes other animals) exhibit this special property called “intention”– as if our brains had some special monopoly on relating to the world through symbol, gesture, roar. This sleight of hand has had us blaming intentions for all sorts of evils, and still entangles contemporary discussions. For example, I once attended a conference on clinical therapeutic technique in which the teachers at once cautioned us not to attribute intention to client behaviors by use of such terms as “manipulation” or “masochism,” while at the same time exhorting us to carefully assess the intent associated with acts of self-harming or suicide…. What confusion is this….?! If a “message” gets lost in transition, whose fault is it really? How do we understand our all too common “failures in communication?” Are observation skills not part of our communication skills? And is the fault not as much with the sender as the receiver? For not observing the receiver closely enough? Indeed, even perhaps for choosing the wrong LANGUAGE…..?