Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here for FREE ACCESS to this landmark database

CiteULike is a free service for managing and discovering scholarly references - click here to get started.

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Theory & Psychology
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Web of Science (1)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Grant, C. B.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Complex Communication and the Self at the Edge

Colin B. Grant

Heriot Watt University c.b.grant{at}hw.ac.uk

This paper uses an interdisciplinary communication-theoretical perspective to evaluate the impact on the self of acute communicative complexity. Here, complexity is seen as a factor of the contingency (or risk) which is embedded in constructions which social actors make in a multifaceted social environment. Without recourse to transcendental models, the aim here is to examine the references of the self and its relationship with cognitive autonomy (as distinct from social freedom). Such referentiality and autonomy are contingent in the sense that they differ in each actor and in each environment. This cognitive autonomy must also be located in an environment with reference to other actors. Meaning is conceptualized as a temporarily stabilized social semantic which is ‘constructed’ by means of communications between cognitively autonomous actors in an environment known as society but without contact with an objective world ‘beyond’ it. Such contingent communications cannot establish direct ‘contact’ with a putatively stable reality or horizon common to all, but operate by means of complex fictions which are in turn temporarily constructed and require constant revalidation. The guiding question is: how does society reconcile stability with autonomy?

Key Words: complexity • contingency • dialogism • interaction • reference • self-reference • social communication theory

Theory & Psychology, Vol. 14, No. 2, 221-237 (2004)
DOI: 10.1177/0959354304042018


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Space and CultureHome page
V. Miller
The Unmappable: Vagueness and Spatial Experience
Space and Culture, November 1, 2006; 9(4): 453 - 467.
[Abstract] [PDF]