Automatic Interpretation

Automatic Processing is something that I have done a lot without really noticing. For example, I sometimes give incorrect answers to questions because I don’t put enough thought into the question itself, and just spout what I automatically thought the answer was. This can be simple questions such as, “What are you doing?” or even mathematical questions, like, “If this was made in 1998, how old is it?” This sort of thing can be seen in shows and movies, like the fourth episode of the first season of “My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic.” Twilight tells Applejack that she is going to help her, no matter what. She wasn’t directly ready for Applejack to say “Yes,” and almost said something as if she said “No.” Despite these automatic responses I make, I have also taken steps to prevent myself from doing so before learning what it was.

These steps include listening to the question and actively pondering it for a moment before forming a thoughtful, honest answer. Although the schemata I may have formed for each question still get in the way when I do think, I’ve gotten better at actually stating direct answers to questions and inquiries.

Men and Women

Men and women use language very differently. Women are more imagery oriented, going by describing what they want to convey by relating it to different images or ideas. Men, on the other hand, are more specific-oriented, and focus on the details and specifics of what they want to convey. They use numbers and measurements, and perhaps seemingly quantifiable desires, to communicate.

This sort of difference in interaction is made very clear when asking two different people directions from the same place to another location, where both know the way there. The woman would tell you how to get there by using street names and landmarks to describe where you would want to turn or stop. The man, on the other hand, would use the number of blocks you’re traveling or the number of minutes you will be driving to get there: Both of which are just as effective, although the two are very different in delivery. 

Perception Judgments

It is technically impossible to perceive others without judging or categorizing them on some level. Because of how each individual was raised, they place different values on different aspects of a person. When you see someone, you look at their appearance: their hair, attire, skin color, and even how they carry themselves. Through these, you come up with an initial idea of how they will be, whether or not said idea is accurate.

The only way to make said judgments to become “fair” is simply realizing the different possibilities with each aspect. For instance, a disheveled hairstyle could imply a lack of personal grooming habits or it could mean they’re struggling somehow and can’t put focus on their appearance. We also use their attire to come up with their mindset or their likes. For instance, you could assume someone wearing a Raider shirt is a fan of the NFL team, the Raiders, where someone wearing a shirt depicting Twilight Sparkle would be assumed to enjoy the show My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic. Many things can have many meanings, and seeing the different possibilities is what makes these “judgments” fairer in the long run as well as immediately.

Historical Context

Historical context behind a speech is something I personally never thought about actively. Things that happen completely alter the attitudes and beliefs the audience holds when they witness a speech. For instance, arguing for reduced security on a school campus would be perceived more positively before a security breach at said campus, like an assault with a deadly weapon on it. On the other hand, an argument for increased security after the event would be received more positively by the audience for the same reasons.

Not only do events have an important part behind the historical context of a speech. There is also personal histories and even repeated events that could alter the perception of an argument or form of public communication. One example would be a speech on the importance of a specific holiday in society. If the holiday was either recent or upcoming, it would be received more positively, while a speech about it six months before or after it would probably be ignored because of this.

Memorable Speakers

The worst speaker I have ever heard wasn’t directly a public speaker. Instead, he was a tour guide, but that still holds a level of “public speaking” nonetheless. What made him such a bad speaker was that he was very monotonous and unentertaining. In addition, he was very static and unmoving, making paying attention to him even more difficult. I barely remember what his message was about the tour we were on because of how boring his speaking happened to be.

On the opposite end, the best speaker I have ever heard was Chris Davenport, an instructor at a United Spirit Association Drum Major Camp. What made him such a good speaker was because he was very into what he said: He’d move and have emotion in everything he said. He was dynamic and also used humor to maintain attention. Why it was so memorable was because he played on being “goofy” while also getting any points he needed to get across.

Well-Known Speaker

One well-known speaker is the current vice-presidential nominee, Paul Ryan. What makes him a good speaker is the fact that he maintains eye contact with the audience, both present as well as through the television cameras. Eye contact is a definite necessity to be a good speaker, as it creates a feeling of being spoken to when the speaker is actually looking at you instead of at a piece of paper or teleprompter.

The strongest characteristic as a speaker that he has is a combination of credibility and power. The fact that he has been present as a representative for as long as he has been shows that his constituents believe that he is doing his job well, as well as that Mitt Romney has chosen him as his running mate. In order to build ethos in his credibility would be to ensure that what he speaks of he has been in support of since the beginning, and doesn’t change his stance to make himself look better.

Patterns of Communication

Communication is most definitely a patterned interaction. Specifically, even in a speech, it goes from a statement of some sort to a reaction, and then a reaction by the speaker. In a conversation, it revolves back and forth from person to person who participates in said conversation. However, in a speech, it just goes from speaker statements, to audience reaction, to speaker reaction to the reaction of the audience, and then continues normally.

Because of the pattern, communication is similar to a game. This is true because, in order to actually pass along an idea, the actions need to be dictated by the target audience. Changing the strategy on how to persuade the demographic or simply communicate a specific point to the audience. Despite this, though, communication is still not exactly a game. A “game” is something one does to derive joy or entertainment, while communication is an action one takes in order to pass along a point or persuade a target audience to take a specific stance.

Communicating Worlds

“Worlds” are built through communication because of the different traditions, legends, and mythos that are passed down through the different societies. In our own, we pass along several different beliefs and ideas from generation to generation, as well as throughout the generation. One example is the emphasis on physical appearance and fitness. Additionally, there are also political views and ideals that are passed down from generation to generation.

Both of the beliefs contribute to the successes and failures of individuals in their professional or social lives. Political views definitely play a part in how well someone can do socially, as those views are an important part of how many people see others. Additionally, one’s appearance also plays a part in acceptance, as people use how one looks to get a general perception of how one is prior to meeting them in a social encounter. Although neither of these should play a part in success, it does so because people place an emphasis on appearance and similar political views, among sports teams, as important factors.

Definition of Communication

Communication is difficult to truly define because of all the mediums it encompasses. Some of these mediums include the written word in essays and articles, and even creative instances like books and poems. Additionally, there is also the spoken word through speeches, simple day-to-day communication, and debates. Even then, there are the senders and receivers in every instance of communication, so there is no real “definition” that encompasses all possible situations.

I agree with the fact that there is no real “definition” for communication because of this. However, I think there are several correct “definitions” that can be used for each instance, creating one large, broad definition for communication. Similar to the word “decimate,” which literally means “to reduce by one tenth,” it has several other meanings, making it synonymous to “destroy” or “annihilate,” “communication” has many definitions, each fitting different situations and mediums.