Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Ideology in Interpersonal Communication: Off the Couch and into the World

Ideology in Interpersonal Communication: Off the Couch and into the World IDEOLOGY IN INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION: OFF THE COUCH AND INTO THE WORLD MALCOLM R. PARKS University of Washington The point at which observations meet value systems is inherently problematic for the communication scientist. Values may be used to stimulate new research and theory or they may give rise to ideologies which ultimately limit and distort our search for scientific understanding. Recent literature on interpersonal communication often exhibits just such an ideology. It is an "ideology of intimacy." Sennett (1977b) has succinctly identified its contents: The reigning belief today is that closeness between persons is a moral good. The reigning aspiration today is to develop individual personality through experiences of closeness and warmth with others. The reigning myth today is that the evils of society can all be understood as evils of impersonality, alienation, and coldness. The sum of these three is an ideology of intimacy: social relationships of all kinds are real, believable, and authentic the closer they approach the inner psychological concerns of each person (p. 259). This ideology has contributed much to the study of interpersonal communication. The first section of my essay explores its extensive influence on how we define interpersonal communication, what we teach, and how http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Annals of the International Communication Association Taylor & Francis

Ideology in Interpersonal Communication: Off the Couch and into the World

Ideology in Interpersonal Communication: Off the Couch and into the World

Abstract

IDEOLOGY IN INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION: OFF THE COUCH AND INTO THE WORLD MALCOLM R. PARKS University of Washington The point at which observations meet value systems is inherently problematic for the communication scientist. Values may be used to stimulate new research and theory or they may give rise to ideologies which ultimately limit and distort our search for scientific understanding. Recent literature on interpersonal communication often exhibits just such an ideology. It is an...
Loading next page...
 
/lp/taylor-francis/ideology-in-interpersonal-communication-off-the-couch-and-into-the-lXlVSday00
Publisher
Taylor & Francis
Copyright
© 1981 International Communications Association
ISSN
2380-8977
eISSN
2380-8985
DOI
10.1080/23808985.1981.11923840
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

IDEOLOGY IN INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION: OFF THE COUCH AND INTO THE WORLD MALCOLM R. PARKS University of Washington The point at which observations meet value systems is inherently problematic for the communication scientist. Values may be used to stimulate new research and theory or they may give rise to ideologies which ultimately limit and distort our search for scientific understanding. Recent literature on interpersonal communication often exhibits just such an ideology. It is an "ideology of intimacy." Sennett (1977b) has succinctly identified its contents: The reigning belief today is that closeness between persons is a moral good. The reigning aspiration today is to develop individual personality through experiences of closeness and warmth with others. The reigning myth today is that the evils of society can all be understood as evils of impersonality, alienation, and coldness. The sum of these three is an ideology of intimacy: social relationships of all kinds are real, believable, and authentic the closer they approach the inner psychological concerns of each person (p. 259). This ideology has contributed much to the study of interpersonal communication. The first section of my essay explores its extensive influence on how we define interpersonal communication, what we teach, and how

Journal

Annals of the International Communication AssociationTaylor & Francis

Published: Dec 1, 1981

References