|
Two-Way Communication (...)
Here we have Joe causing a communication, and Bill’ failing to continue the cycle. We do not know or inquire, and we are not interested in, whether or not Bill as the receipt-point ever did hear it. We can assume that he was at least present, and that Joe spoke loudly enough to be heard, and that Bill’s attention was somewhere in Joe’s vicinity. Now, instead of getting on with the cycle of communication, Joe is left there with an incompleted cycle and never gets an opportunity to become Joe’.
There are several ways in which a cycle of communication could not be completed, and these could be categorized as:
1. Joe failing to emanate a communication,
2. Bill failing to hear the communication,
3. Bill’ failing to reply to the communication received by him, and
4. Joe’ failing to acknowledge by some sign or word that he has heard Bill’.
We could assign various reasons to all this, but our purpose here is not to assign reasons why they do not complete a communication cycle. Our entire purpose is involved with the noncompletion of this communication cycle.
Now, as in Graph A, let us say we have in Joe a person who is compulsively and continually originating communications whether he has anybody’s attention or not, and whether or not these communications are germane (pertinent) to any existing situation. We discover that Joe is apt to be met, in his communicating, with an inattentive Bill who does not hear him, and thus an absent Bill’ who does not answer him, and thus an absent Joe’ who never acknowledges.
Let us examine this same situation in Graph B. Here we have, in Bill, an origination of a communication. We have the same Joe with a compulsive outflow. Bill says, “How are you?” and the cycle is not completed because Joe, so intent upon his own compulsive line, does not become Joe’ and never gives Bill a chance to become Bill’ and acknowledge.
|