Principles from the Phil Keaggy exercise
We are visual learners.
John 20:24-29 - But Thomas, one of the twelve, called Didymus, was not with them when Jesus came. So the other disciples were saying to him "We have seen the Lord!" But he said to them, "Unless I see in His hands the imprint of the nails, and put my finger into the place of the nails, and put my hand into His side, I will not believe." After eight days His disciples were again inside, and Thomas with them. Jesus came, the doors having been shut, and stood in their midst and said, "Peace be with you." Then he said to Thomas, "Reach here with your finger, and see my hands; and reach here your hand and put it into My side; and do not be unbelieving, but believing." Thomas answered and said to Him, "My Lord and My God!" Jesus said to him, "Because you have seen Me have you believed? Blessed are those who did not see, and yet believed."
Matthew 8:5-13 - And when Jesus entered Capernaum, a centurion came to Him, imploring Him, and saying, "Lord, my servant is lying paralyzed at home, fearfully tormented." Jesus said to him, " I will come and heal him." But the centurion said, "Lord, I am not worthy for you to come under my roof, but just say the word, and my servant will be healed. For I also am a man under authority with soldiers under me; and I say to this one 'Go!' and he goes, and to another, 'Come!' and he comes, and to my slave, 'Do this!' and he does it." Now when Jesus heard this, He marveled and said to those who were following, "Truly I say to you, I have not found such great faith with anyone in Israel. I say to you that many will come from east and west, and recline at the table with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven; but the sons of the kingdom will be cast out into the outer darkness; in that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth." And Jesus said to the centurion, "Go; it shall be done for you as you have believed." And the servant was healed that very moment.
Seeing is believing? Or, believing is seeing?
Which mediums might we value least - oral, auditory, visual, textual, multi-media?
Jacques Ellul
from "The Humiliation of the Word"
Image - related to reality (sight, space)
Word - related to truth (hearing , time)
*note: Ellul values the spoken word over the written
An image can be accurate or inaccurate but not true or false.
Only words can be true or false.
…sight and language determine two different kinds of thinking. Language, which is written, involves a long, careful process. My eyes follow the words one after the other, and thus a sequence of understandings are connected to each other. Thought develops according to the axis of this sequence of words. I receive knowledge progressively as the elements of what I am trying to understand link up in succession. Ideas are gradually laid bare as I follow the sentence. The sentence unfolds within a given time span, so that my knowledge necessarily takes the form of step-by-step reasoning. My knowledge progresses by following the curves of this language, assuming a certain continuity in the sentence and rationality in the relationship between words.
…images link themselves up to each other in a manner that is neither logical nor reasonable. We proceed by association of images and their successive changes. The aspects of an image that change in this process have to do exclusively with the spectacle in its present moment. They are never a logical sequence. … it is not the characteristics of electronic signals which have made the difference, but the manner in which images follow each other. When we think by means of images … each image is a totality, and the sequence progresses by fits and starts.
We run into trouble when we confuse image with truth.
(not opposed to images, but opposed to their elevation above the word)
The word (spoken) is primary, it instructs us about the image.
Our society puts the image first (or believes that words only speak of reality and not truth).
In the Garden, reality and truth were united.
Genesis pattern - "Then God said...and God saw that it was good."
When sin entered the world, truth and reality were separated.
Humanity submitted to reality and separated from truth.
This rupture is called sin.
Eventually, truth and reality will be rejoined.
A key question for us - as media becomes more visual (and visual learning preferences increase), what are the implications?
Or, what challenges does this present to us as Christians if seeing is believing becomes the norm?
Coding
In order for understanding to take place in a communication setting, there must be a shared language and a shared culture.
1. Shared language
2. Shared culture
Communication technology is constantly creating new language and new culture.
Do the companies/content creators have a teaching responsibility?
Do users have a learning responsibility?
What happens when the process breaks down?
Exploring Communication Technology Theology
1. By principle
God is a communicating God.
We are created in the image of God.
We are communicating creatures.
We live in a fallen world.
Our communication is fallen.
and by extension, our use of com tech is fallen.
a few principles to consider:
God uses a variety of mediums to convey His message (God is a rich and diverse communicator).
God's preferred method is to use human beings to convey His message.
God is patient, using multiple ways to make sure people have the opportunity to understand His message.
Every message God sends is worth paying attention to.
2. By method
telecommuniction
tele (Greek)
communication (Greek)
Do these terms fit together?
Can distant communication be personal?
How does God "bridge the gap" in com tech settings?
What methods does God use?
Consider Jesus:
1 Timothy 2:5 - For there is one God, and one mediator also between God and men, the man Christ Jesus. (NASB)
John 1:1 - In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. (NASB)
Jesus is the medium and the message, making the distant personal.
3. By model
SENDER encoding teaching worthiness g a t e k e e p i n g |
|
RECEIVER decoding learning worthiness f i l t e r s
|
medium |
||
message
|
||
| feedback |
Ex. Nehemiah 8:1-12
What messages are worth sending?
Does the sender have any responsibility for what they send?
How should messages be encoded?
Typically there are gatekeepers - those who direct the flow of information.
Access to information is not unlimited (or equal).
What messages are worth receiving?
How should messages be decoded?
What filters are employed?
Is one medium better than another?
The medium influences what is sent and how it is sent.
Not all transmission systems are the same.
Is feedback possible? If so, how?
Neil Postman
Media Ecology
Basic Premise: The dominant media in a society influences how we think and process information.
Postman saw television as the dominant medium and visual images as the dominant form of information.
Postman saw the Internet as an extension of television.
For the above, see "Amusing Ourselves to Death" for below see "Technopoly"
Questions to ask about any new communication technology.
1. What is the problem to which this technology is the solution?
ex. telegraph, FM radio
2. Which people and what institutions might be most seriously harmed by a technological solution?
ex. the digital transition and the poor
3. What new problems might be created because we have solved this problem?
ex. pornography and the loss of shame
4. What sort of people and institutions might acquire special economic and political power because of technological change?
ex. printing press
Dr. Sochay's 3 Immutable Laws of New Communication Technology
1. There is a direct relationship between new communication technologies and the pace of life.
fast, fast, fast!
Charles Hummel in Tyranny of the Urgent: "A person's home is no longer a castle, a private place away from urgent tasks. The telephone breaches its walls with incessant demands. The appeal of these demands seems irresistable, and they devour our energy. But in the light of eternity their momentary prominence fades. With a sense of loss we recall the important tasks that have been shunted aside. We realize that we have become slaves to the tyranny of the urgent. (1967!)
2. There is a direct relationship between new communication technologies and convenience.
now, now, now!
How do we respond when we don't get an immediate response to a text or can't find what we want on the first page of a Google search? How patient are we?
3. There is an inverse relationship between new communication technologies and our ability to hear God's voice.
later, later, later! (when things slow down)
The immediate crowds out the eternal.
FOMO
A challenge: What does the Bible say about pace of life, convenience, and the ability to hear God's voice? (and what role might com tech play in that process - both positively and negatively?)
How does the life of Christ fit with the 3 Laws? Did his life demonstrate a way to avoid the trap of a fast, now, later life?
George Simmel
Social Distance - the perceived lack of intimacy between two or more individuals.
from Wikipedia - Social presence theory argues that the social impact of a communication medium depend on the social presence it allows communicators to have. Social presence is defined as a property of the medium itself: the degree of acoustic, visual, and physical contact that it allows. The theory assumes that more contact will increase the key components of "presence": greater intimacy, immediacy, warmth and inter-personal rapport. As a consequence of social presence, social influence is expected to increase. In the case of communication technology, the assumption is that more text-based forms of interaction (e-mail, instant messaging) are less social, and therefore less conducive to social influence.
How does communication technology encourage or discourage the perception of intimacy in relationships?
letter writing instant messaging/texting/tweeting phone calls Facebook (and other social media sites such as Instagram, TikTok) flickr, Pinterest (and other photo webhosting sites) blogging chatrooms, forums, wikis etc. skyping/zooming/Facetime face to face (the non-tech option)
How would these verses interact with Simmel and com tech?
"let us consider how to stimulate one another in love and good deeds, not forsaking our own assembling together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another, and all the more, as you see the day drawing near." Heb. 10: 24-25
Umbrella Perspective
"no single technology can be understood without understanding the competing and complimentary technologies and the larger social environment within which these technologies exist."
Figure 1.1
Levels to consider
Hardware - the communication technology itself
Software - the messages/content of the communication technology
Organizational Infrastructure - those involved in the production/distribution
Social System - the political, economic and media systems environment etc.
Individual Users - actual and potential
All five of these levels must be examined to understand a communication technology
Factors to consider
Enabling - makes an application of communication technology possible (technical, legal etc.)
Limiting - limits an application (technical, legal etc.)
Motivating - reasons/incentives for adopting (business and user needs)
Inhibiting - disincentives for adopting (business and user needs)
Each factor can be used to evaluate each level (hardware only enabling/limiting)
Rogers' Diffusion Theory
Innovators (2.5%) - launch the technology, clique-ish, venturesome, want to try new things
Early adopters (13.5%) - opinion leaders, respected, role models, deliberate but willing to try
Early majority (34%) - legitimizers, not first, not leaders, but willing
Late majority (34%) - skeptical, cautious, may be responding to pressure or economic necessity
Laggards (16%) - resistant, don't like change
A key - the need for critical mass (competition!)
other factors
1. socioeconomic status - whether measured by income, occupational prestige, or in years of formal education, innovative individuals are relatively more elite than those who adopt later (or reject).
why?
non-trivial costs
greater likelihood of being aware of the importance of information (or perceived need for)
non-controllable factors affect socioeconomic status such as the state of the economy, natural disasters, medical concerns etc.
2. generational (age differences)
resistance to change
familiarity (comfort level)
the medium(s) grown up with
3. cultural differences
not all cultural groups value technology/communication the same as others
Social impacts of diffusion - not all impacts are positive
Relative Constancy Principle
People only have a finite amount of leisure time.
Time spent on new communication technologies will come at the expense of old communication technologies (or other leisure activities).
What are the implications?
How might multitasking fit in?
Is the Relative Constancy Principle true in your life?
“Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic”
Arthur C. Clarke (1962)
Uses and Gratifications
a focus on the user of com tech (origins in the audiences for mass media)
Why do users of com tech have differing patterns of media exposure?
- social and psychological origins of needs
- which generate expectations of com tech (and other sources)
- which leads to differential patterns of com tech usage
- resulting in need gratifications and other consequences (which can be unintended)
- which influences subsequent patterns of com tech usage depending on whether our expectations/needs were met
What are some of the needs we have that lead us to use com tech?