Technology is unavoidable in today’s society, and we are constantly interacting with others via texting or social media. When we utilize texting or instant messaging to communicate with others, this often includes informal language or jargon that can easily translate into our professional lives, while also taking away the dynamics of nonverbal communication or the intimacy that comes along with face-to-face discussions. In this paper, I intend to examine Aristotle’s understanding of rhetoric and how he employs it to address various emotional states, as well as Walter Ong’s media ecology to analyze how instant messaging and social media have taken away the intimacy of orality. I will be supporting my analysis by utilizing Aristotle’s theory
…show more content…
There is an importance in understanding the soul and body of others, where the soul acts and the body is acted upon. The communication between the soul and body is deliberate, and it is consistently happening. It is important to understand Aristotle’s views on psychology and particularly the soul and body, since “psychology and psychiatry deal with the manifestations of the psyche and, therefore, examine the mental functions of human beings, normal and abnormal, and classify them into certain categories” (Ierodiakonou 15). Ultimately, it is vital to understand the complexity of the psyche, and how the soul, in Aristotle’s view, is directly involved with all communication and …show more content…
Basically, secondary orality is “any electronic communication dependent on writing and print in order to exist” (Dempsey 26). It is because of this change in orality into an electronic culture that there is an impact on how we interact with others, for example Ong states “Reading aloud to family and other small groups was still common in the early twentieth century until electronic culture mobilized such groups around radio and television sets rather than around a present group member” (154). It appears to be that now there exists a mixture of orality and literacy. The opportunities of second orality, include “a shared experience with other viewers and with persons” (Thomas 390). This heightens the existential relationship between people, and in turn creates a feeling of collectiveness, where there can be “presence without physical presence” (Thomas 391). Consequently, this blurring of fiction and reality results in a new verbal art form which Ong finds necessary to understand. We are constantly exposed to secondary orality, meaning there is constantly the potential to interact with others in a new form of
There is an importance in understanding the soul and body of others, where the soul acts and the body is acted upon. The communication between the soul and body is deliberate, and it is consistently happening. It is important to understand Aristotle’s views on psychology and particularly the soul and body, since “psychology and psychiatry deal with the manifestations of the psyche and, therefore, examine the mental functions of human beings, normal and abnormal, and classify them into certain categories” (Ierodiakonou 15). Ultimately, it is vital to understand the complexity of the psyche, and how the soul, in Aristotle’s view, is directly involved with all communication and …show more content…
Basically, secondary orality is “any electronic communication dependent on writing and print in order to exist” (Dempsey 26). It is because of this change in orality into an electronic culture that there is an impact on how we interact with others, for example Ong states “Reading aloud to family and other small groups was still common in the early twentieth century until electronic culture mobilized such groups around radio and television sets rather than around a present group member” (154). It appears to be that now there exists a mixture of orality and literacy. The opportunities of second orality, include “a shared experience with other viewers and with persons” (Thomas 390). This heightens the existential relationship between people, and in turn creates a feeling of collectiveness, where there can be “presence without physical presence” (Thomas 391). Consequently, this blurring of fiction and reality results in a new verbal art form which Ong finds necessary to understand. We are constantly exposed to secondary orality, meaning there is constantly the potential to interact with others in a new form of