To put this in perspective: Imagine that a group of aliens comes down and visits Earth. We want to explain Earth's culture and history to them, but they do not understand us. Do we:
1) hand them pages and pages of meaningless written symbols for them to decipher or try to talk in gibberish noises to them (the use of "language")
2) show them our masterpieces of art
3) play them music
4) show them our mathematical achievements and equations
In this case, art, music, and math might actually serve as better methods of communication than language would. Isn't a picture worth a thousand words? And sometimes music can express our feelings better than words ever can. Perhaps math is even more universal than language, given a few basic assumptions, such as 1 + 1 = 2.
Art History class and Newsweek magazine have provided me with two interesting quotes, with the first elevating art over language and the second describing music's advantages over other medium.
From Ernest Boyer, President of the Carnegie Foundation:
"But even with the beauty and power of the written and spoken word, our miraculous use of language was was incomplete. For the most intimate, most profoundly moving universal experiences, we needed a more subtle, a more sensitive set of symbols than the written and spoken word. And this richer language we call the arts. And so it is that men and women have used...the visual arts to transmit most effectively the heritage of a people, and to express most profoundly their deepest human joys and sorrows and intuitions, too."
From Daniel Levitin, the author of "The World in Six Songs"
"What music is better able to do than language is to represent the complexity of human emotional states."
So, what is the most effective method of communication, especially for transmitting human emotions and feelings? Words do have their limits, and yet society has been founded upon the literary pooling of knowledge.
Interestingly enough, the Voyager spacecraft carries a golden disk with it that is supposed to enlighten aliens upon Earth's culture. It includes art, music, math, and language.
Here's a Wikipedia link about it:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voyager_Golden_Record
Comments? (We'd better be ready when those aliens come...)
(Eric Wei)
7 comments:
Eric brings up an intriguing question here: what is the most effective method of communication, especially for transmitting human emotions and feelings?
In a way, I think that this question does not possess a single, definite answer. Since communication requires both a "speaker" (one who conveys information) and a "listener" (one who receives information), the effectiveness of a certain method of communication is dependent upon two factors: 1)the ability of the "speaker" to convey his/her emotions/info with the particular method AND 2)the way in which the "listener" perceives the emotions/info being conveyed. I would imagine that everyone expresses himself/herself more freely or easily in different ways, and that everyone will perceive things in different ways due to variance in peoples' intensional worlds.
Thus, I think that there is no single "most effective method of communication." Rather, the method of communication that maximizes effectiveness varies with each situation. In other words, how effective a certain method of communication is depends on: 1)who the "speaker" and "listener" are and 2)the particular emotions/info being conveyed.
Despite what I have stated thus far, I feel as if there SHOULD be a single "most effective method of communication" since I am so intrigued by Eric's question. Yet I cannot get myself to think in more general terms; my thought process is confined to communication in specific cases. I need help - does anyone agree with what I have stated, or is there someone who can think more broadly and point to a single most effective method of communication?
(Janet Lee)
Although I do not know which is the most effective way of communication-art, music, math, or language, I feel as if the use of language must accompany the first three forms of communication to make them more effective.
For example, if we play a song to the aliens, how would they know what that means? If we show them a picture of the American flag(symbol of America!), how would they know the significance of it? The most problemic case is math. Do you think the aliens will know what the numbers are? For the aliens, math will look just like language-another set of gibberish.
So I think we will still have to enlighten those aliens with language(even if it is not the most effective, that's all we've got)if the time ever comes..
(Jennifer Park)
Several posts ago, I posed a question. Do actions speak louder than words? I gues in Eric's case of alien visitors, they do.
But aren't art, music, and math also forms of language? There are no boundaries set. Language neither begins nor ends with the alphabet. Language is any form of informational exchange.
When we feel our sentiments to be expressed by a certain piece of music or art, the different chords and splatters of paint are "talking" to our emotions. Is this not a form of language? Ideas are conveyed from the figurative speaker (music or art) to the concrete listener (us). There is an understanding between the two, a sense of cooperation. As Hayakawa states, "The togetherness of the talking, then, is the most important element in the social conversation; the subject matter is only secondary" (Hayakawa 58).
Mathematics is a universal subject. A non-English-speaking German man has the ability to solve the same problem as an English-speaking man. Engineers from all over the world share their calculations for international construction extravaganzas. While words have the ability to easily fluctuate in meaning, numbers, for the most part, do not.
"Language, that is to say, makes progress possible" (Hayakawa 7). Relations between the aliens and humans will progress as the music, art, and math has been spread and shared. A commonwealth of knowledge will develop.
To answer Janet's question, I do feel that a common language could be ultimately developed between the aliens and humans. A series of noises/grunts in addition to pointing and body movements could develop another form of understanding. This task, however, would be a tedious one.
(Sam Maliha)
Maybe it's just me, but I'm a bit confused. How does language have that much of a 'limitation' in conveying human emotion/feeling? Didn't we all agree that there are affective connotations attached to nearly every word? If that isn't enough, there is also tone and emphasis placed on certain words to convey more emotion.
As for the question, I'm going to take the side of the person who designed the golden disk in the Voyager. Math, music, language, and art are all important important aspects to our culture. I don't think that one is really 'better' than the rest, or 'more efficient' for that matter. Perhaps there are times when the arts are able to reflect the complexity of human emotion better than language and math. However, what about the quote 'some things need to be said'? And as Sam brought up, math is universal. So even though we would like a single most effective method of communication, I think that it's impossible. Communication between humans -even humans by themselves- are just too complex.
I think the point that Eric brings up is definitely worth thinking about. I know, personally, that many times I listen to music (my favorite of the three methods of communication that Eric mentioned) and am so inspired, but then when I try to explain to someone how I feel, that person justs smiles and nods, but I can tell that they have barely a clue about how I feel. So, yes, I do feel that when it comes to strong emotions, music can be more affective than words. I think words are most notable for their informative value (at least when I'm the listener). This makes me wonder... is the fact that music arouses emotions so effectively the reason why affective language many times involves rhythm and repetition...? I do agree with some of the above comments, that language comes in many forms, and words themselves can have affective connotations. I agree with Janet, as well, that the mode of communication that is most effective is completely dependent on who the speaker and listener are.
(Just a side note... I would imagine that there are even sub-categories in each of the modes of communication that Eric mentioned. For example, certain types of art my speak to my emotions more strongly than others... thoughts?)
Emily T.
I'm having a bit of trouble deciding which type of communication is best right now.. I have a hunch it's because of Eric's mention of aliens..
All these emotions that we're talking about - they're all human. Yes, one can wax eloquent on the universal nature of love and such.. Call me jaded, but I think that the concept is entirely idealistic. We, as humans, may be able to communicate effectively with other humans through musical means etc. when written and spoken words fail us, but that's because we share aspects of our semantic environments. We have all lived on the earth and have similar methods of perceiving things (i.e. eyesight and hearing).
Now, when aliens come into the equation, we open the door to all types of possibilities. We don't even know if they exist - how are we supposed to impose any sorts of assumptions upon them in an educated manner? Love, for instance, is already such an abstract concept for humans to grasp. Do aliens even have an equivalent to love? Are they able to hear music, much less find it remotely pleasing or communicative?
I guess the hypothetical nature of any situation involving aliens just has too many variables to it.. Or maybe I'm over-thinking the prompt?
Tiffany, you are indeed right in saying that Eric's prompt is very much a hypothetical situation about which we do not know enough. And of course it is unlikely that such a situation involving aliens will ever happen...or at least I hope...
Yet I do think that for our purposes, that is, in pondering the effectiveness of different methods of communication, you may be over-thinking Eric's prompt. We are not discussing the possible flaws of the prompt itself; Eric was merely trying to provide an example situation to which he could relate his question.
On the other hand, I admire your careful analysis of the hypothetical nature of the prompt. :)
(Janet Lee)
Post a Comment