Early Days of Telecommuting

I began working from home back in the early decades ago after the birth of my second child. I started a company of my own and even though I didn’t report to a manager, I was accountable to clients.

As my company grew and I hired employees, they would check in every morning for their various assignments, swinging by my home/office each morning for their work cards, supplies, and team assignments. My son, toddling around in diapers, would be perched on my lap as I typically had a phone in one ear, and assignment cards for the employees in the other as they lined up waiting for their assignments.

I had a dedicated space, which had formerly been the (twice a year utilized) formal dining room. My employees were in and out of my home each morning between 7:00 am and 7:30 am Monday through Friday. They knew never to come any other time of day or night so there was definitely an absolute separation between work and family time responsibilities. Once my children were home from school, I was completely theirs’ until bedtime. If I had leftover work to do for business, it was done after they were asleep.

While I have watched other of my friends telecommute over the more recent advancement of technology and its popularity, I have seen how difficult it can be for some to balance work and family when they work from home.

I had never considered telecommuting or working from home in any capacity to be a potential challenge, because my experience was that working from home allowed me to focus without worrying about other responsibilities. I was able to be a working mom and still insure that I was there every morning and every afternoon when my children came home from school. I loved the added discipline it took to run a business from my home, an early version of telecommuting, because it helped me to live a more balanced life and save an hour or more each day that I would have spent on the road commuting.

Oh, another perk…laundry seldom piled up because I was home to keep the washer and dryer going each day in between talking to clients and handling other business matters. 

An "Emily" Post

When it comes to cell phone use in public places I will sometimes remind total strangers that no one really wants to hear about their latest fight with their boyfriend, recent doctor's visit or worse. It has to be a really loud and obnoxious extended conversation for me to finally pipe up and say something, but I will do so as politely as possible when I feel it's needed. Such was the case recently as a young woman was sharing the intimate details of her latest STI. I was studying in a Panera Bread and she was half way across the room talking veraciously on her cell phone about the recent infection her cheating boyfriend bestowed upon her. The conversation was clearly upsetting the other patrons, and since there was no way to escape her conversation without leaving their meals behind and exiting the restaurant. I quietly went by the gal's table and whispered, "You may want to talk a little quieter." Almost on cue, she said, "Oh my gosh, I'm sorry." And then she stood up and went outside to finish her conversation in a more private fashion. Sometimes I think we're all guilty of not realizing how our conversations may be affecting those around us, strangers or not, but clearly some conversations are best left totally private.

Answering machines are a joke! They are annoying and outdated and remind me of my parents and grandparents. Most people who still have them that I know of, only use them to screen calls and seldom actually listen to any messages left for them. If I reach an answering machine, I hang up and hope to connect with them another time.

I think depending on the number of callers on a conference call, it could be that there are few enough participants that once  we introduce ourself on the call, it would seem odd to keep announcing who we are each time you speak. Also, if we're going to speak to anyone other than those on the conference call or if there is anything generating noise around us that we cannot quiet, it is absolutely critical that we place our phone on mute and speakerphone unless we are going to be speaking. Otherwise, it's best to reschedule the conference call to when it can be void of distractions and background noise.

Faxes are a bit outdated now with scanning and email capabilities, but should when I do have to fax I like to call ahead and let the recipient know to expect it, and I only fax what is absolutely necessary. Otherwise, I view unexpected faxes as the equivalent of spamming, and I have never found it necessary to fax or call anyone for business after normal business hours unless all parties involved realize that it is necessary.

I prefer to keep a pleasant, short and welcoming voicemail message with a simple ring tone and basic screen names so that I don't have to concern myself whether the incoming call is personal or for business. If I want to be more personal and creative I save it to sending texts, pictures, or leaving messages on others' phones.

Ethical Obligations and My College

There is a shared identity with organizations and the environment (community) that they live in and are tied to; not only locally, but also globally. Ethically, there are additional obligations implicitly placed upon the organizations. These ethical obligations seem to be growing at a rapid pace with environmental issues becoming more and more prevalent, and the advancement of information technology providing for a more informed world.    

The ethical obligations and impact of organizational decisions made by the college I attend are far reaching. As I have become active in student government on my college campus, it can sometimes be challenging to me when I see the bureaucracy that takes place. This is especially true when I feel that the overall impacts of the decisions being made are not fully taken into consideration. Whether it is expanding the physical campus, traffic and parking congestion or solar panels geared to feed the grid, the ethical obligations of these decisions and more have a significant impact and responsibility to the extended community.

Mutually Satisfying Vacation

Managing interpersonal conflict takes an ongoing effort, daily, sometimes hour by hour depending on the health of the relationship. This is the case regardless what category the relationship falls into: parent/child, husband/wife, employer/employee, friend/friend, even professor/student.

The degree by which we successfully manage conflict depends greatly upon the willingness of the parties to openly and directly discuss their needs; at least this is so in our American low context culture.

I think it’s easy to look at a particular pair in conflict and immediately judge the situation, identifying the vocal one of the pair as more the aggressor, therefore, more the problem, the controller.

This is not always the case, and in my own experiences with those close to me I have found the individual who is passive-aggressive, who withdraws as the one who has more control over the matter. Not to say, this is true in all cases, but in my interpersonal family relationships, I have come to learn that this is the case, most often.

I appreciate the text suggesting problem solving as oppose to compromise. It makes great sense to think of a new creative answer that helps both parties obtain what’s important to them, as oppose to both walking away disgruntled and left wanting.

Take the example of the couple regarding taking a vacation; one party wanting to do so alone, the other wanting a joint vacation. In this example, a problem solving solution could be openly discussed with each party stating their need behind what they want, and then split the vacation time in half, taking some alone vacation time, and some together. This way, both parties receive what’s important to them, and feel heard.  Of course, this technique requires two mature people willing to collectively work together to find a mutual satisfying solution, which unfortunately, is not always feasible depending upon the individuals and the tools they have learned to utilize.

Love Lost...

Interestingly, I have actually done the reverse of the question posed in this week’s discussion: “Have you ever eliminated someone by using a sociological or pre-interaction cue only to reconsider them based on interaction and cognitive cues?”

I have been single almost a decade now. I have come close to remarrying twice. In both relationships, it was interaction and cognitive cues that initially brought us to have such an intense bond that we considered marriage.

All the while, in both relationships we lacked the sociological (demographic) cues as we lived thousand of miles apart, and in the end distance played a pivotal role in the dissolving of the relationship.

Of course, we knew early on that distance was a challenge, but we felt that our amazing interaction and cognitive connection would bring us to be able to resolve the distance challenge and carry us through to our “happily-ever-after.”

That was not the case. We were both entrenched in our communities, businesses, and families so that our bond did not penetrate the challenge and bring either of us to submitting to moving across country. It was heartbreaking for both of us, but it was also very realistic decision and one that I believe prevented either of us resenting having submitted and left life as we knew it.

Rigid Belongs Equated with Highways!

Although change in most any area of life can often be challenging, I think the rigid complimentary is the most difficult relationship to change. I tend to view anything prefaced with the word “rigid” other than a highway, difficult.

Take the example shared in our text as a starting point, that of a parent-child relationship. When a child is young it is pivotal for the safety and well being of the child that a parent exercise areas of rigid authority, in a “one-up role.” 

Yet, as the child grows and becomes a young adult and beyond, I believe it is vital for parents to learn to shift their former rigid role of authority into that of an influencer, and more complementary in the sense of sharing the one-up dominant role and one-down submissive with their child. This is easier said than accomplished, as it is difficult and requires constant effort and awareness to shift into the adult-adult roles of complementary equality.

It’s not to say that respect and honoring of the elder parent shift, but more the realization that the child is no longer a child in need of rigid authority for safety and care. When a parent is able to make this shift, it provides an environment for the child to move more easily into the role of an emotionally mature, well-equipped and able adult; one who is less resistant to authority and advice when it is seriously warranted and welcomed.

This ideal takes both parties working together to understand the changing needs and shifting of the relationship roles. To accomplish this allows the parent-child relationship the opportunity to flourish into the next season of life, adult-to-adult.

Culture Shared - Choice or No Choice?

Early on in life we are grouped together and identified as belonging to this family or that ethnicity, the athletes, the cheerleaders, the smart group, etc. Our text states that “because cultures are shared, we are not entirely free to act as we wish” (326).

I wish to dispel this notion and say that freedom in this instance is a choice, and as we mature and become more diverse in our experiences we can choose to grow beyond this notion and realize we have a choice to choose the freedom to act as we wish regardless of our shared culture…within legal limits, of course.

I think what inhibits this reality of choice is staying within a single culture and never stepping outside of that culture to experience or empathize with other cultures beyond those we are familiar with, and stymied to.

Then there is the matter of honoring the culture you are experiencing and to use an old cliché, “when in Rome, do as the Romans do.”  This is important to conform, but to honor, which is also a cognitive free choice. 

Equally Observable Premises?

I firmly believe in the premises of rationality, perfectibility, and mutability; however, having traveled throughout 17 countries to date, I believe, that to some extent, they are most observable in more developed societies. For instance, it is not as easy to observe the mutability premise throughout the greater continent of Africa because as a third world continent, it is overpowered by extreme poverty.  This does not equate to dispel the premise, quite the contrary.  It is just to say that to remove someone from their environmental factors to observe the improvement in their physical and psychological circumstances is not readily accomplished or observed.

Many social institutions are based on these premises throughout our world, but none more than countries with democratic government systems, which although structured in a hierarchical manner, operate under the rationality premise and rely heavily upon logical analysis to arrive at decisions. Other non-governmental environments including small and large corporations, non-profit organizations, and others follow this model and rely upon this premise, also.

Society's Culture and an Individual's Culture

I agree, to some extent, with Benedict’s declaration that we are “creatures of our culture” and that our habits, beliefs, and impossibilities are shaped by our culture. However, I also believe that our physical environment, parents, social economic status, education and other factors contribute a significant measure of input into our individual culture.

I believe collectively as a specific society we are shaped more according to Benedict’s philosophy; and that it is possible to be individually shaped by a litany of other factors, the likes of which some are previously mentioned.

Take for example, a 20-year old native Californian, college girl who lives with her parents, was home-schooled, and attends a traditional conservative American church. Her peers are dating, going to parties, camping with friends, taking road trips during school breaks and all the other activities that are culturally acceptable and expected of college students in our modern society.  Meanwhile, she finds nothing abnormal about her parents forbidding her from joining in her friends’ activities, and requiring she keep them apprised of where she is at all times, while she is not allowed to date, go to parties, or on camping or road trips without her family. Because of her sheltered home environment, overly protective care of her parents and her ultra conservative education, she never considers challenging her parents’ strict rules and if anyone suggests she should, she defends their behavior because even though it is not the cultural norm for America, she believes her parents are behaving normally. Her individual culture is in direct opposition of her society’s culture.

Spatial Affects

I found the topic of spatial arrangement and its affect on our lives and the communication process interesting. I can hardly recall a time in my life when I was not acutely aware of furniture placement, seating arrangements, and overall room aesthetics in every facet of my life.  Without knowing the do’s and don’ts of why I would sit in a certain place, or prefer furniture arranged a certain way specific to the people and context of the gathering, ex: business, family, etc. or whether I felt a need to disarm someone’s defensiveness who was sitting at the table with me, or feel I was more in a power position, after reading this portion of our text, I now realize I was inherently tuned into the affect of spatial arrangement beyond wanting to sit next to someone I was interested to talk to. There have been occasions where I’ve been aware of sitting at the head of the table in business when I am leading something, and other times when I have been mindful to sit in the middle seat around a table when I wanted a more collaborative communication process, but I am inspired to know there is an actual term and concept surrounding what I did naturally to facilitate communication as I deemed appropriate.  It is very interesting how spatial and visual surroundings have such an impact on our lives.

Kidnap attempt, Saudi Prince & the Left Hand

I’ve been fortunate to have traveled 17 countries and 38 states, to date.  I love to travel.  Interestingly enough, I haven’t recognized different nonverbal meanings stateside or regional. Perhaps, it's because I have had a great deal of experience with varying nonverbal messages abroad.

Take for instance, as a woman traveling in Israel.  I was informed I was not to make any direct eye contact with any men, although they could (and did) gawk at me, to the extreme.  I traveled with a group of twelve; about half married, the other half of us single.  If an Israeli man wanted to approach or speak to me, he would first nod to one of the men in our group and then look at me as if to ask one of the male traveling companions in our group for permission to speak to me.  There were a few occasions when we were fine dining that a man would just come up to our table and directly speak to one of our male companions and ask for permission to speak to me.  I have to say, as a strong, independent woman this was not easy for me to sit through quietly, but I am wise enough to know I needed to let the customs of the land and my male companions handle the matter.  It worked most of the time, although I did get mauled for a kiss by a street seller who nearly brought a riot to erupt. I, also, had three proposals including one from a Saudi Prince where the ante went all the way up to 180 camels (woot, woot!).  And rather sadly, I came all too close to being kidnapped in Bethlehem.  Talk about nonverbal messages!  I read the culprits’ (two men) clues loud and clear, as a few natives of the area did their best to protect me by screaming and drawing attention to the incident because they knew better than I what the nonverbal signs were. I definitely learned never to lag behind my group or go back to the bus for anything alone, again.

In Africa, I’ve traveled to five countries; Ghana, Nigeria, Ethiopia, Kenya, and Tanzania.  Throughout the continent, it is never appropriate to touch anyone or anything with your left hand. If you do so, it's a sign of disgust or disrespect. This is the hand Africans use in the “restroom” which is often void of toilet paper… thus, the left hand.  It is also not acceptable for a woman to show her knees.  She can walk around topless anywhere, breasts fully visible, but if her knees show she’s being sexually suggestive.  Also, you never use your hand to gesture for someone to come over to you.  This is interpreted as, “Let’s go to bed together.” 

Best to know the customs of the land!  Happy travels. J  

The Proverbial Crossed Arms

A former boyfriend of mine had a fairly regular habit of crossing his arms in front of himself  He is a muscular build which only seems to intensify the appearance of his non-verbal message of either being closed off to what those near him are communicating, or that he is upset.  I finally grew accustom to accepting that often times he was not sending either message, it was just that he is comfortable with his arms crossed.  Like some of us are most comfortable with our legs crossed.

I was pretty successful at reading him most of the time, but there was one occasion at a social event where I misread his stance, didn't look to read the message his eyes were sending me, and we had a sizable disagreement about it on the way home.  I forgot that non-verbal behaviors can have many different meanings (128).  If I had stopped the behavior I was doing which was precipitating his being upset, looked in his eyes to read his facial message, and more importantly, just come out to ask him if he was upset I probably could have prevented one of our few major challenges.  .

To increase accuracy with which we interpret nonverbal messages, it’s important to make the effort not to automatically stereotype the nonverbal messages of others, no matter how well we seem to know them.  It is also important not to assume that what we are individually comfortable with pertaining to things like personal space and/or cultural norms are what others are comfortable with.  It is equally helpful when we are mindful of the nonverbal messages we send others, whether we do so purposefully or not.

Understanding My Dear Friend in a New Way

One of my dearest and closest friends from my Sierra college experience is of Filipino ancestry and was raised in Hong Kong.  He is an amazing individual who recently transferred to UCLA.  We worked very closely in leadership together on a number of on and off campus projects.  We had to constantly learn how to adapt to one another’s extremely opposite communication and leadership styles; mine which is known to be more direct than most (male or female), and his which I viewed as too passive for leadership. This seemed odd as I knew we both possessed strong leadership abilities. I attributed our differences more to personality differences than cultural since he seemed well integrated into American society. 

I have come to realize after reading this week’s text that our communication style differences have most likely had more to do with the fact that he originally comes from a high-context culture and I come from a low-context culture. 

He does not have an automobile, and the Sacramento region is not known for its ease of public transportation.  Given my recent understanding of high and low context cultures’ affect on communication, I now understand why he never directly asked me for a ride somewhere, but would indirectly mention his “working on transportation.”  I often picked him up in my car, and would sometimes be frustrated that he didn’t just come out and ask me to pick him up. I mentioned to this to him many times, asking him to “just come out and ask me.”  I understand now that he was simply doing what he felt was proper and respectful.  He was not being passive.  He was conducting himself according to his high-context, verbal-indirectness cultural upbringing.  I can’t wait to share this new revelation and understanding with him when I visit him in southern California next month.  

Ah, the Splendor in Gender!

Men and women absolutely do use language differently, but that is not to say that they do not also use language in similar ways.  As much as we would like to dispel gender notions, it remains a truth that they exist, and the gender expectations of both sexes vary to the extent that we are groomed early on to use language differently. However, I also believe some of the use of language differences stem from genetic and personality differences.

Case in point, I have raised two children who are now adults. My eldest a daughter, and six years behind her, I have a son.  My daughter genetically takes more after their father, and my son, more after me.  Interesting enough, while some of the gender differences cited in our text regarding language use are clearly witnessed in my two children, ex:  public matters (sports, news, etc.) more discussed by my son, more detailed color terms used by my daughter; and definitely, more tags such as “you know” and “right” are used by my daughter.  However, that’s about where the traditional tendencies of each gender end.

Our entire family is sports and competitive minded, focused on individual achievement and supporting one another in these endeavors and verbally discussing them equally, regardless of gender.  This has now carried over into both my children’s families with their children.  And, while my son is definitely a strong male, he tends to be more nurturing in relationships like I am than his sister who takes genetically and personality wise more after their father.  My son is more activity minded though, whereas my daughter enjoys activities but will sometimes talk away about various relationship matters throughout much of the activity.

I think genetics as much as gender expectations have at least some affect as to how male and female use language differently, and while both genders have similarities, we do well to take individual personalities, and to some extent, even birth order into consideration.  

Retraining Our Natural Tendency

It’s a stated fact we automatically judge others in the first few seconds (5-7) when we first see them.  We, also, have a tendency to judge others more harshly and ourselves more charitably.  I feel it’s important for each of us to make a more conscious effort to be more cognitive of judging information as oppose to judging people. 

It is difficult not to make initial assessments, judging and categorizing others. It tends to be a natural behavior, though some may disagree and prefer to categorize it as a learned behavior.  Regardless, things are never all this or all that... anymore than people are ever all good or all bad. We are all complex beings with varying lenses through which we view others and life experiences. My journey is not yours, nor is your journey mine. We will do well to stop the personal dogma, regardless of what lens we see through. Let's work (myself, so included!) to give others more grace, especially those who we have the most difficulty with... may we help each other reach greater heights, touch more lives in a positive way, and judge ourselves more honestly... my personal melancholy thought of the day.

From a scholarly point of view, it is said that when we exercise “cognitive complexity is a mark of maturity and is necessary for good communication” (49). When we lack in cognitive complexity and tend to use one or two simple constructs, ignoring contradictory information or experiences, we struggle to have a large, rich, and varied set of personal constructs and mature.

Empathy and active listening is critical in reaching for less judgment of others, but only if it’s genuine.  So next time we rush to judge others, let’s take a moment, pause, reflect, and reconsider how we can better respond in a caring, nurturing, and respectful manner regardless of whether we agree with or like the individual or not.  We can chose to disagree without being disagreeable or judgmental, but it takes effort and retraining our natural tendencies.

Faulty Communication Responsibility

I found it thought provoking to read the material regarding “Improving Faulty Communication” (26).  While there wasn’t an in-depth look at this subject in Chapter 1 or 2, I’m hopeful there will be more said on the subject in future text.

Over the years, I have been known for a few “Barbara-isms.”  A couple that can be aptly applied for my discourse on the subject of faulty communication is: “Leadership is always the problem, and communication is always the answer,” and “It takes two to make a relationship [of any kind] work, and one to make sure it doesn’t.” 

I believe faulty communication is primarily seen in our culture as being the source, or sender’s responsibility, and that we tend to view the sender as the leader in communication.  I don’t think this is always true.   I contend it is equally as important, if not almost more important, for the receiver to actively listen to the message for the sender to best be understood.  That is not to remove responsibility from the sender to communicate clearly, being certain to use “code” familiar to the receiver, or provide opportunity and a safe environment for the receiver to give feedback; but moreover, it is to say that the receiver must take the responsibility to minimize impeding “noise” or “competing internal stimuli” so that the sender’s message can be properly interpreted. 

I believe faulty communication can best be repaired when there is a willingness to look into the receiver’s responsibility, regardless of whether the sender and/or receiver have had shared experiences or not.  This would seem to be possible only if the sender has articulated their message in a respectful tone.  But even then, if the receiver is not actively listening responsibly, it won’t matter how well the sender delivered the message.  I think it’s all too easy to immediately point the finger at the sender when there is faulty communication occurring because they are the audible participant, when, in my opinion, the listener has a significant responsibility, too, and one that is more challenging to successfully assess because it’s often taking place internally.

Game Time

2). Consider the pragmatic perspective.  Does it make sense to think of communication as patterned interaction?  How is communication like a game?  How is it different from a game?

I found the pragmatic viewpoint of interest because I’ve often been quoted as saying, “No answer is an answer.” And it turns out, I’m correct, although many have made argument with me, otherwise.  Now, according to our text, I have the facts to back up what I have always insisted is true:

          “According to the pragmatic viewpoint, the smallest significant unit of    communication is the interact, which consists of two sequential acts….every action is important. Every   player is affected by what another player does…. [they] need each other if they are to play [communicate]….If a friend promises to write to you and doesn’t, his or her silence speaks louder than words.…it is impossible not to communicate, just as it is impossible not to behave” (32).

I’m not convinced communication is a patterned interaction, as yet, though.  I need more insight into this school of thought before drawing a conclusion.  I do, however, see communication having some semblance of a game.  The speaker says this; the receiver does that.  The speaker says this; the receiver does that, back and forth like a tennis match. Regardless, of whether the speaker and receiver have knowledge as to what to expect from the other, some interplay of action, verbal and/or non-verbal is continuously occurring.  I think the interpretation of what either sender or receiver may do or say, can be predictable depending upon the intimacy level shared within the relationship. 

At the same time, communication can be said to be different from a game, because while there are perceived rules of engagement similar as in a game, participants do not have to play by those perceived rules for there to be communication. Whereas; in a game if someone does not choose to play by the rules the game is, most often, over or does not occur at all.

First Amendment Perceived Realities

1). Consider the social constructionist perspective.  How do we "build worlds" through communication?  Think of some ideas we talk about in our culture that may not exist in other cultures.  How do these concepts contribute to our happiness or success (or the lack of these) in our culture? 

Given an American cultural context considering the social constructionist perspective, our political democratic society has been formed in large part from unilateral views based on First Amendment rights within our Constitution.  They are: freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom of the press, freedom to peaceably assemble, and freedom to petition the government for redress.  Many Americans, and other democratic societies worldwide, view this perspective (and its subsequent rights) in a prideful, and sometimes seen, arrogant ethnocentric stance; that is to say, culturally superior to other societies void of democracy.

Our citizens believe these democratic concepts, and our ever evolving vociferous communication of these concepts, contribute to our overall happiness and success, primarily focusing on our right (and ability) to choose, to disagree, and still reside within a civil society.  Democracy, as we know far too well, is not present in all societies within the world we live in today.  And many, even longtime patriotic Americans, from all sides political parties are becoming, more and more, assertive to voice their concerns that our First Amendment rights are eroding in rapid fashion.   It is our freedoms, which is an inherent tool within our society utilized to “create [our American] collective representation of reality”(24).

The Merging of Arts and Sciences

 Pick one concept from the assigned reading, not already discussed, that you found useful or interesting and discuss it.

The Merging of Arts and Sciences

I am always intrigued when the study of Arts and Sciences converge.  I am most often noted as a definite right brain individual, and find myself significantly more drawn to the Arts, not only because I’m an expressive individual, but because I tend to more readily assimilate the information in this field than in the field of the Sciences.  Given such, I found the modern period of rhetoric in the path of the psychological epistemological approach to be of eye opening interest.

As a student of communications, I have often heard of the equally, if not a more important role, of the listener/receiver in relationship to the speaker/sender. Active listening versus passive, and the perception lens in which a listener receives and accepts the intended information being delivered, plays an important role as to whether authentic communication is actually taking place.  In fact, it’s noted active listening is a greater percentage of the communication process than verbal speech. 

Additionally, to receive knowledge (the message), it seems imperative for the speaker to take into consideration the psychological disposition of thought and the individual or collective group lens of perception in which the receiver(s) view the speaker, the intended message, and the relationship which exists amongst them.  For a speaker to forego this consideration in advance of delivery, and not place great emphasis on the receiver(s) as active participant(s) in the formulation of meaning and interpretation of the message, seems futile.  It is this merging art and science through the psychological epistemological approach that not only intrigues me, but places a new lens upon my own inquisition and understanding in the field of communication.

Power to the Pathos!

1). Think of a speaker you admire (please do not use the President of the United States as an example).  Does his or her power to persuade come from ethos, pathos, or logos?  Think about your own ability to persuade others.  What personal qualities do you have that make you persuasive?  Does Aristotle's classification scheme work for them, or do they fit into another category?

I admire a number of modern American speakers, but for the purposes of this question I’m going to choose Oprah Winfrey for her overwhelming ability to persuade a wide variety of people from all three categories: ethos, pathos, and logos; However, although she persuades from an ethos base of trustworthiness and credibility, and her facts and sources are well researched and verifiable, I believe it is her pathos ability which is her strongest ally and greatest force of power to persuade an extensive and diverse audience.

As for my ability to persuade others, I think I, too, am best known for my pathos ability to reach the heart of others.  I am very passionate about most things I speak on, especially when it comes to protecting children, and addressing third world poverty, childhood slavery, or lack of education.  I use facts (logos), and am viewed as credible because of my humanitarian work overseas, but my primary source of power to move people to respond, definitely comes from pathos.

I think the classification scheme of Aristotle best works with my pathos ability in that I am able to align my presentation to deliver a difficult, often uncomfortable to hear message regarding starvation or childhood slavery, and make a palatable appeal to a wide variety of audiences, taking the setting, and status of that audience into consideration, and adapting appropriately so as to be effective.  

Influence and Responsibility

#2). The Greeks believed that to be an orator, an individual had to be morally good.  Comment on whether you agree or disagree.  What, if any, is the connection between goodness, truth, and public communication?

Throughout historical Greek society, orators were expected, almost required, to be of good moral character because those allowed to speak publicly greatly influenced the shaping of their society.  As time has progressed, orators have come from all walks of life, and been of both good moral character (think Martin Luther King, Jr.), and grave evil hearts (think Hitler). 

The consistent thread regarding orators, transcending history and culture, is that an orator remains influential and able to greatly impact its audiences and/or society, especially a well crafted and gifted orator.  Ideally, I agree our world is best served when goodness, truth, and public communication are synonymous, a collaborative effort to empower society for the greater good.  Unfortunately, it is well known that this is not always the case. Therefore, I believe it is incumbent upon audience members to be educated in dissecting rhetorical argument, researching truth as they personally interpret it to be, and staying attuned to the goodness they possess internally, opting to nurture and apply it to external input, and thus, quell evil. 

To be an orator is of high honor, and comes with great responsibility. To influence another is an extremely powerful tool.  As well, to influence and govern oneself, orator or receiver, is imperative! I think Shakespeare summed it up nicely in Hamlet when he writes, “This above all: to thine own self be true, And it must follow, as the night the day, Thou canst not then be false to any man.”

This thing called "Blogging."

Okay, I've learned a lot more about technology since attending college.  That does not mean I have mastered much beyond writing, emailing, and researching.  This "blog" creating and posting thing beyond Blackboard is definitely a new venture.  It may take me a bit, but I will eventually get it and be grateful.  For now, it's a wee bit disconcerting... fingers crossed. :)

Here goes...

Greetings fellow students and Professor Carol:

My name is Barbara Gabaldon, and I'm a returning Sierra student double majoring in English and Communications.  I completed my English degree with Honors in May 2011, and had the privilege of being peer selected to deliver our Commencement speech.  It was following the ceremony, when a Congresswoman in attendance for another student approached me to encourage me to further pursue Communications. It proved a pivotal and life changing moment in my life, which led to my decision to double major.  I will forever be grateful for the time she took to seek me out and speak into my life.  I heeded her advice, and will complete my Comm degree this semester before transferring to University.

As a late bloomer, re-entry student (I'm a mother of two adult children, and a grandmother, aka: "Nana to five cuties),  my time at Sierra has been packed with new adventures. I am quite grateful to have the experience!  I have been active on campus, serving as an ASSC Student Senator, Vice President of Service for Sierra's Phi Theta Kappa International Honors Society Chapter, and the closest position to my heart, President of the World Impact Club, where we are working to open a school in Tanzania to save eight year old girls from being sold off as a sex slave under the guise of being a 40 plus year old man's "wife."

After reviewing the materials presented online for this course, I sense we have a solid opportunity to learn and grow extensively throughout the semester.  If I can be of any assistance to you for any reason, please do not hesitate to ask.  If I cannot assist you, I may be able to refer you to someone who can.  I'm quite resourceful and well networked among our campus, faculty, and students.

Here's to a great semester! :)