" Free speech implies that all voices feel they can be heard without censure (or censor). In the domain of social media, " This reply, reorienting my reply, seems to be about the differentiated, rational and reasoned thought based, self ( see Murray Bowen's concept ), not license or other psycho-cultural, conforming constraints to communicate . Where is the " ability " for open discourse sourced , the initiation in power and choice ? The container is just noise in this context , I think .
I'm trying to understand your comment fully. I understand the part "not license or other psycho-cultural conforming constraints to communicate" in the context of the aphorism and my reply. But I'm fully grasping what you mean by "differentiated, rational and reasoned thought based self" or your last points "Where is the " ability " for open discourse sourced , the initiation in power and choice ? The container is just noise in this context , I think ." Could you articulate that more or rephrase it.
I'm at the edge of grasping it but I just want to make sure I do before I reply lest I add irrelevant threads and tangents
I assume your last posted response meant: "' NOT ' fully grasping " , and then the object in what follows " grasping. " A differentiated self is one that doesn't react to the ego's pull to conform, or to depart from truth, fact, and the reasoned applicable and relevant logical conclusions and supported opinions therefrom. Murray Bowen theory is my reference in the posted parentheses. I pulled your word concept " ability " from your post to focus on agency of the individual communicator , speaker . ( I didn't think that you were dealing with a variety of McLuhan's notion that every ' medium ' delivers info in different ways and that content is fundamentally shaped by the medium ( container ) of transmission . ) My reasoning for ' ability' is the power of a fully functioning ' individual' self to select consciously and unconsciously from her/his top down perceptions the materially relevant meanings and responses . So noise implied non-materiality . Hope this helps clarify ?
No it's not that. It's the idea of "free speech" as the ability to have open discourse about for example political topics. Free speech implies that all voices feel they can be heard without censure (or censor). In the domain of social media, usually the discourse is loaded in one direction such that it's easy to express agreement with the herd (whether that be left or right or whatever the binaries are in that discourse) and you might get piled on for disagreeing.
" Free speech implies that all voices feel they can be heard without censure (or censor). In the domain of social media, " This reply, reorienting my reply, seems to be about the differentiated, rational and reasoned thought based, self ( see Murray Bowen's concept ), not license or other psycho-cultural, conforming constraints to communicate . Where is the " ability " for open discourse sourced , the initiation in power and choice ? The container is just noise in this context , I think .
I'm trying to understand your comment fully. I understand the part "not license or other psycho-cultural conforming constraints to communicate" in the context of the aphorism and my reply. But I'm fully grasping what you mean by "differentiated, rational and reasoned thought based self" or your last points "Where is the " ability " for open discourse sourced , the initiation in power and choice ? The container is just noise in this context , I think ." Could you articulate that more or rephrase it.
I'm at the edge of grasping it but I just want to make sure I do before I reply lest I add irrelevant threads and tangents
I assume your last posted response meant: "' NOT ' fully grasping " , and then the object in what follows " grasping. " A differentiated self is one that doesn't react to the ego's pull to conform, or to depart from truth, fact, and the reasoned applicable and relevant logical conclusions and supported opinions therefrom. Murray Bowen theory is my reference in the posted parentheses. I pulled your word concept " ability " from your post to focus on agency of the individual communicator , speaker . ( I didn't think that you were dealing with a variety of McLuhan's notion that every ' medium ' delivers info in different ways and that content is fundamentally shaped by the medium ( container ) of transmission . ) My reasoning for ' ability' is the power of a fully functioning ' individual' self to select consciously and unconsciously from her/his top down perceptions the materially relevant meanings and responses . So noise implied non-materiality . Hope this helps clarify ?
If you are saying that language and communication requires context to have meaning , then ithat relevance is beyond just speech
No it's not that. It's the idea of "free speech" as the ability to have open discourse about for example political topics. Free speech implies that all voices feel they can be heard without censure (or censor). In the domain of social media, usually the discourse is loaded in one direction such that it's easy to express agreement with the herd (whether that be left or right or whatever the binaries are in that discourse) and you might get piled on for disagreeing.