A Far from Simple Introduction to Communication: Review Essay
Itay Shani2016, Philosophy of the Social Sciences
Sign up for access to the world's latest research
checkGet notified about relevant papers
checkSave papers to use in your research
checkJoin the discussion with peers
checkTrack your impact
Abstract
Any author who manages to write a penetrating, thoughtful, and evocative book on an underappreciated topic deserves applause. Nimrod Bar-Am does this and much more. The problem which he takes upon himself to investigate is fascinating, original, and of considerable magnitude, for it is nothing less than the question "Is there a theoretical basis distinctive of communication studies as such?" Or to give the inquiry a more ontological slant, the question can be reformulated as follows: "is there a (non-trivial) common denominator to all communication phenomena, and, if so, could it serve as the ground for a conceptually unified field of study?" There is but little doubt that this type of inquiry is of paramount relevance for those who have keen interest in the theoretical foundations of the academic field of communication studies, or for those seeking a philosophical basis for understanding communication as a pervading multilayered and cross-disciplinary phenomenon. Yet, oddly enough, such general inquiry into the nature of communication and into the possibility of a unified field of communication studies is rare. Bar-Am explores this murky territory like a seasoned traveler whose abundant knowledge does not compromise a keen eye and an open heart, and he delineates the contours of the landscape in a manner which is detailed enough to provide substance yet also abstract enough so as to reflect the prefatory status of his query and invite future voyagers to conduct their own journeys down the path. In braving this trailblazing task, Bar-Am does us all good service, and his passion for his subject makes the reading not only intellectually gratifying but also sown with moments of pure joy.
Related papers
Some Foundational Conceptions of Communication: Revising and Expanding the Traditions of Thought
Empedocles: European Journal for the Philosophy of Communication, 2013
Keywords communication theory communication studies traditions of thought DIsCussIoN Peter simonson university of Colorado, Boulder Leonarda García-Jiménez state university of Murcia Johan siebers university of Central Lancashire robert t. craiG university of Colorado some foundational conceptions of communication: revising and expanding the traditions of thought abstract This work presents and defines three meanings of communication taking into account some of the traditions of thought that founded our field of study. These three conceptions are: communication as an architectonic art; communication as a social force;
2 Theories and models of communication: foundations and heritage
Theories and Models of Communication, 2013
This chapter charts the historical influences on the theories and models that shaped the communication discipline. This chapter illustrates the importance of U.S. and European scholars from not only the beginnings of the communication discipline, but those who were pre-eminent in other academic disciplines such as sociology, psychology, political science and journalism, as well as examining emerging scholarship from Asia that focuses on understanding cultural differences through communication theories. The chapter traces the foundations and heritage of the communication from five perspectives: (1) communication as shaper of public opinion; (2) communication as language use; (3) communication as information transmission;
From the consideration of communication as a field to the consideration of communication as a transdisciplinary concept: history, theory and objects of knowledge
The present work focuses its attention on the role history has had in the construction of the field of communication, the research practice and in the possibilities of moving from the consideration of communication as an academic field to the consideration of communication as a transdisciplinary concept. The article pays special attention to the history, theory and to the objects of knowledge
Communiquer Revue de communication sociale et publique Reflection on " Communication Theory as a Field "
Publisher Département de communication sociale et publique-UQAM Printed version Date of publication: 1 septembre 2009 Number of pages: 7-12 The text is a facsimile of the print edition. © Communiquer
Chapter 4: Communication Meaning
Communication and Beyond, 2022
The book reviews the establishment of communication education in Australia from the mid-1970s. It assesses changing government mandates, the evolution of communication study and teaching, premier communication courses, faculty personalities, new career options, and experiences putting communication into practice through academic and external relations initiatives. Chapter 4 on Communication Meaning examines the field of human communication studies and the impulses driving a key stage of pioneering efforts in the development of communication study and teaching in Australia. It outlines six major groupings of meanings and senses of the word "communication" that researchers, teachers, and practitioners used at the time of the 1980 inaugural conference of the Australian Communication Association (now the Australian and New Zealand Communication Association). Opportunities for conscious cooperation among academics from diverse disciplines to expand understandings of communication are outlined. The chapter incorporates points from the author's paper "Finding Communication Meaning in Australia," presented at the Association's organizing conference. Commencing from a challenge that Communication Studies is not a discipline, the paper offers clarification of uses of the word "communication" in the academy and in practice as an impulse for the development of a coherent field of study. It is suggested the new Australian Communication Association encourage inquiries well-grounded in collaborative understandings of the diverse theoretical explanations of communication. Reference is made to efforts among mass communication and communication researchers who advocate pluralistic perspectives on communication. The chapter notes Canadian efforts at the time to clarify communication terminology and describes further evolution of the Australian Journal of Communication, as well as detailing the broadening of course offerings and some faculty personalities contributing to this early development of communication education. In closing, it considers the promise provided by focusing on communication as the mutual development of understanding and knowledge.
Adler, R. B. and Rodman, G. R. (2009). <i>Understanding human communication</i> (10<sup>th</sup> ed.). New York: Oxford University Press
Communications, 2009
The ideology of communication: Post-structuralism and the limits of communication
Continental Philosophy Review, 1982
There has appeared, recently, an interest in the philosophical implications of com munication. This concern has taken two forms: First, "communication" has provided a foundation for accounts of other aspects of human life (e.g., language, human nature, social reality). Such work assumes that it already understands the nature of communication. Second, alternative theories of communication have been generated from particular philosophical perspectives (e.g., phenomenology). Such work substitutes theory for philosophical investigation: its major thrust is to produce new research programs and critiques of other communication theories. One never asks if the grounding philosophy is built upon an unquestioned understanding of communication. In both cases, "communication" itself is not problematized.
Related papers
Review of N. Bar-Am 'In Search of a Simple Introduction to Communication.pdf
This is a review essay (aka, long review) of 'In Search of A Simple Introduction to Communication' by Nimrod Bar-Am (Springer, 2016). Forthcoming in 'Philosophy of the Social Sciences'.
Theories and Models of Communication: Foundations and Heritage
This chapter charts the historical influences on the theories and models that shaped the communication discipline. It illustrates the importance of U.S. and European scholars from not only the beginnings of the communication discipline, but including those who were pre-eminent in other academic disciplines such as sociology, psychology, political science and journalism, as well as examining emerging scholarship from Asia that focuses on understanding cultural differences through communication theories. The chapter traces the foundations and heritage of communication study from five perspectives: ($) communication as shaper of public opinion; (%) communication as language use; (&) communication as information transmission; (') communication as developer of relationships; and (() communication as definer, interpreter, and critic of culture.
What's in a name? Defining communication and communication theory
European Journal of Communication, 2023
Communication is among the most used and least theorized concepts across various disciplines, including communication studies. There are many communication theories and models, most of which take communication for granted, only as a name and an unproblematic/self-evident concept. The concept's ambiguity relates to the definition of borders and the discipline's content. In 'Communication theory and the disciplines', Jefferson D. Pooley (2016a) presents an exhaustive list of disciplines that relate or are sensitive to communication theory, including sociology, psychology, political science, geography, economics, philosophy, history, literary studies, and cognate fields such as cultural studies, visual studies, game studies, popular music studies, gender studies, and LGBT studies. Located at the intersection of various disciplines, communication studies host a plethora of analytical frameworks, epistemological paradigms, and research interests. However, 'what it gained in intellectual richness. .. it lacked in disciplinary focus and shared identity' (Waisbord, 2019). Labeling communication studies as a post-discipline, Waisbord points to ontological plurality, theoretical heteroglossia, hyper-specialization of contemporary scholarship, and the overall decline of grand theories as the main reasons for the identity crisis. Communication is defined as connection, dialogue, expression, information, persuasion, and symbolic interaction (Waisbord, 2019). However, the ontological status of communication as such has not been adequately elaborated. What defines communication scholarship? What is the object and subject of communication? Most important of all, what is communication? These questions remain and seem to remain valid in the foreseeable future.
What is the science of communication? A possible definition
International Journal of Social and Educational Innovation (IJSEIro), 2021
The article's aim is to provide a definition of the science of communication together with the delimitation of the field of research and the identification of a general research method. The starting point is the general phenomenon of communication in the living world, as the research field of communication science is limited, by successive delimitations, to media discourses. The most important aspect that has been highlighted is the political nature of media speeches. Politics de-homogenizes the discursive mass and at the same time provides a clear criterion for classifying discourses. Thus, insofar as communication is media-based, it is also a political communication. The science of communication is defined as the study of the phenomenon of integration and discursive distancing, in other words of the discursive competition and social negotiation. The starting point of the entire process of definition is the work "Autonomous Discourse. Communication Strategies" (2013).
Communication as a Discipline and as a Field
Discusses the origins and history of communication as an academic discipline, including its evolution from ancient Greece and its academic roots in journalism and speech. Provides a summary of some approaches to the content of the communication discipline.
The Two Sciences of Communication in Philosophical Context
Two claims are at stake for a science of communication. This essay brings into focus the philosophical distinctions between the human science of communication and the social science of communication. Social science is argued to be the dominant paradigm in mainstream communication inquiry in the United States. Its underlying basis is information theory. Communicology is a human science that differs from social science in that it focuses not on the message but rather the cultural-semiotic constraints on embodied phenomenological experience. This is a unique human science approach. The grounds for comparison are located in the history of these contrasting views and in their problematic concerns. American pragmatism and social psychology are depicted as analogous to European philosophy and the Geisteswissenschaften. As this essay argues, the human science of embodied discourse is historically rooted in semiotics and phenomenology and lead to a synthesis in contemporary communicology. Communicology is distinguished from cultural studies, and a vision for the future discipline is advanced.
Investigating Communication: Remooring the Contours of Research
Sage, 2005
As an exercise in intellectual history, this essay unfolds the state and status of communication research in India at the turn of this century. In the first section, a thumbnail sketch has been provided to unearth the politics in and behind communication research in India. In the second section , extent debates and emerging trends are highlighted. Finally, it offers (then) preliminary thoughts on apprehending the subject-matter of 'communication' as a critical intellectual pursuit.
Epistemological approach to communication research: meanings of communication, disciplinarity and criteria for building a discipline
Revista Latina de Comunicación Social, 2020
Introduction: In “Ferment in the Field” (1983), 37 years ago, Katz stated that the best thing that had happened to communication research was to stop looking for evidence of the media's ability to change opinions, attitudes and actions in the short term to analyze its role in the configuration of our images of reality. Mattelart (1983) encouraged scholars to study the interaction between audience and media from a noncommercial perspective and Ewen (1983) proposed using oral histories or literary sources. Four decades later, the short-term effects of media continue to be studied, predominating the analysis of their content (Martínez Nicolás and Saperas, 2011, 2016), the type of analysis on which, as it happened thirty years ago (Cáceres and Caffarel, 1992; p. 12), the field seems to support its specificity, suffering the lack of an intellectual institutionalization (Peters, 1986; Lacasa, 2017) which can be filled through a meta-research of ideas that distills perspectives, concepts and methods used in communication research. Method: Through the analysis of three reference volumes in meta-research, the volumes of the Journal of Communication “Ferment in the Field” (1983) and “The Future of the Field. Between fragmentation and cohesion” (1993), and the volume 1 of Rethinking Communication (1989) “Paradigm Issues”. Results: We will be bringing perspectives regarding the meanings of communication, the disciplinary character of the field of communication research and regarding the requirements needed for turning this field into a discipline. The perspectives and proposals emerge, mainly, from two ways of understanding communication: as product or result and as a relationship.
Review of Philosophical Profiles in the Theory of Communication
Empedocles: European Journal for the Philosophy of Communication, 2014
Communication as a field
This essay reconstructs communication theory as a dialogical-dialectical field according to two principles: the constitutive model of communication as a metamode1 and theory as metadiscursive practice. The essay argues that all communication theories are mutually relevant when addressed to a practical lifeworld in which "communication" is already a richly meaningful term. Each tradition of communication theory derives from and appeals rhetorically to certain commonplace beliefs about communication while challenging other beliefs. The complementarities and tensions among traditions generate a theoretical metadiscourse that intersects with and potentially informs the ongoing practical metadiscourse in society. In a tentative scheme of the field, rhetorical, semiotic, phenomenological, cybernetic, sociopsychological, sociocultural, and critical traditions of communication theory are distinguished by characteristic ways of defining communication and problems of communication, metadiscursive vocabularies, and metadiscursive commonplaces that they appeal to and challenge. Topoi for argumentation across traditions are suggested and implications for theoretical work and disciplinary practice in the field are considered.
Loading Preview
Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.