Part 1
Speaking without any means of formal communication, such as speaking and writing proved to be extremely challenging. It almost became a game of charades and got quite silly quite fast. The person I chose to "speak" to was my mother, and she ended up asking me questions in the form of yes or no, and to emote my feelings on questions she had that were unable to be asked in a yes or no format.
I was not really in control of the conversation because it was difficult to begin new topics. I could show interest or disinterest in something but it was up to my mom to talk about new things. I've had times where I've not spoken in group conversations before, and I've noticed that no one really engages me in conversation, which made me a bit upset. I could see similar happening with the experiment.
I think if the conversations represented which culture spoke and which did not, perhaps it would be more beneficial to have spoken language. Stories could be passed down from generation to generation with exact understanding of what someone was talking about, and not much could be left to interpretation.
Part 2
Speaking without physically emoting or showing expressiveness I found to be absolute torture. Personally, I am a very expressive and animated person who has grown custom to moving alongside my speaking to engage my audience, and just to feel what I am saying. Removing that factor and trying not to move was extremely hard and I was often caught and had to restart the exercise a few times before I got it perfect. My mother had no trouble understanding me but she said I looked stiff.
This experiment shows that communication goes beyond words. Thinking of examples like misinterpretation of words from a text where if the person were there physically to tell you something and show you their body language, you would understand their sincerity a lot more.
At its most extreme, reading body language can effectively save your life. If someone is clearly agitated and showing aggressive behaviours in their bodies you can know better to run or evade this person.
My brother who falls in the Autism spectrum actually has a hard time reading body language and understanding cues like that. I notice it on a daily basis. However, this could be extremely beneficial if someone is fidgety and trying to talk, they could ignore that distraction and get important information as needed.
Hello Emily,
ReplyDeleteFor part 1 i had the same experience where my partner was asking simple yes and no questions in order to get an answer from me. These types of questions seemed best because a simple nod or shake of the head would give them a definite answer. I have also experienced not talking within a group and feeling almost as if i was nonexistent within the group discussion.For part 2 I agree with you that communication goes beyond words and that physical language is also as important. This was a great post!
Hello Emily!
ReplyDeleteMy friend and I had reached the same conclusion with asking yes or no questions. This tactic made the conversation a little bit easier. You make a great point when discussing group situations. I feel as though one is often excluded from a group if he or she does not speak. Also, I am somewhat amused that you felt tortured by the second part of the assignment. The reason being is that I, too, am very animated. Our second discussion was the least bit entertaining because I was not able to show any emotion to any content. One benefit of reading body language has to do with survival. In my post, I mentioned a clenching of fists to indicate aggressive behavior. As for the very last section, we both mention autism. My friend has a son, who is also on the spectrum.
Part A:
ReplyDeleteOkay on your opening description, but don't be afraid to expand and create a clearer picture for your reader.
Good discussion on the issue of power.
With regard to the speaker vs. non-speaker comparison, the issue here was which one would be better able to explain complex issues. Would you be able to explain Darwin's theory of evolution by natural selection without symbolic language? Could you even do science without it?
Missing the point on attitude of the speaking to the non-speaking and a real-life example that mirrors this experiment.
Part B:
Good description of your second experiment.
The second and third sections are key to this assignment and I would have liked you to explore these issues more fully. Most importantly, you are only considering the situation where body language matches and supports the information you receive from spoken language. What does it tell you when the body language doesn't match the spoken language? Humans tend to use body language as a type of lie detector. If spoken words don't match with the body language, we are more inclined to believe the body language and doubt the words. Think about how being able to detect liars might help an individual's ability to survive and reproduce (which applies to the next section).
Okay on the benefits of body language, but what type of benefits do you get by being able to detect liars?
Yes, those in the autism spectrum do have difficulty reading body language. That is precisely the example I was looking for.
Regarding your last point, even with a fidgety person, we can still get useful information from other aspects of body language. I can't agree it would be best to ignore the body language in this situation... just be selective of what you pay attention to. To answer this question, you have to consider if there are situations where body language gives you false information, not because someone is lying to you (body language usually belies a lie), but because you don't understand the system of body language they are using, just like you might not understand a different spoken language. Do all cultures use the same system of body language? If you travel to another country, can you trust the information you get from their body language?