scholarly journals A speaker-oriented multidimensional approach to risks and causes of miscommunication

2012 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 216-243 ◽  
Author(s):  
Arto Mustajoki
Keyword(s):  
Common Ground ◽  
Physiological State ◽  
Cognitive Effort ◽  
Common Denominator ◽  
Multidimensional Approach ◽  
Multidimensional Model ◽  
Research Directions ◽  
The Common ◽  
Physical Defects ◽  
Mental Worlds

Combining ideas from different research directions and fields, the paper presents a multidimensional model of communication which enables to explain the risks of communication more comprehensively than before. The process of producing and interpreting speech is described through a message transfer circle. The model also includes the mental worlds of the speaker and the recipient, which substantially influence interaction. In addition, special attention is paid to recipient design, which plays a crucial role in interaction. One may even argue that such frequently mentioned factors as misreference or ambiguity are not causes of miscommunication but only risks for it; the real cause of miscommunication is incomplete recipient design. The common denominator is the egocentrism of the speaker: avoidance of cognitive effort, common ground fallacy, emotional overdrive, obstacles caused by physiological state or physical defects, and attaching greater importance to other things at the expense of recipient design.

The Common Ground of Wesley and Edwards

1990 ◽  
Vol 83 (3) ◽  
pp. 271-303 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard E. Brantley
Keyword(s):  
Common Ground ◽  
Jonathan Edwards ◽  
Philosophical Theology ◽  
Great Awakening ◽  
Common Denominator ◽  
John Wesley ◽  
Direct Impact ◽  
The World ◽  
The Common ◽  
Religious Morality

Although evangelicalism is “spiritual” and empiricism is “natural,” the great principle of empiricism, that one must see for oneself and be in the presence of the thing one knows, applies as well to evangelical faith. Each of these two methodologies operates along a continuum that joins emotion to intellect; each joins externality to words through “ideas/ideals of sensation,” that is, through either perception or grace-in-perception or both. While empiricism refers to immediate contact with and direct impact from objects and subjects in time and place, evangelicalism entertains the notions that religious truth is concerned with experiential presuppositions and that experience need not be nonreligious. On the basis of the experiential common denominator between empiricism and evangelicalism, through the “both/and” logic of philosophical theology, I argue that John Wesley (1703–91), founder of British Methodism, and Jonathan Edwards (1703–58), leader of the American Great Awakening, theologize empiricism. They ground transcendentalism in the world, balance religious myths and religious morality with scientific reverence for fact and detail, and ally empirical assumptions with “disciplined” spirit. Above all, they share the simultaneously rational and sensationalist reliance on experience as the avenue to both natural and spiritual knowledge.

Graded Theism: A Fundamental Theology of Religions

2021 ◽  
pp. 002114002110391
Author(s):  
George Karuvelil
Keyword(s):  
Conceptual Framework ◽  
Recent Work ◽  
Common Ground ◽  
Interreligious Dialogue ◽  
Scientific Study ◽  
Common Denominator ◽  
Theology Of Religions ◽  
Fundamental Theology ◽  
The Common

This article is set in the context of the pastoral difficulties in embracing interreligious dialogue. Tracing the problem to the seeming incompatibility between dialogue and proclamation, it goes on to argue that this difficulty can be overcome by providing an adequate conceptual framework. Using some recent work in fundamental theology, the article proposes ‘graded theism’ as providing the needed conceptual grounding for overcoming the said incompatibility. This article clearly distinguishes fundamental theology from theology of religions, philosophy and theology from scientific study of religions, the common ground required for dialogue from the lowest common denominator of religions postulated on the basis of scientific study. The last distinction enables one to maintain both commonalities as well as particularities of religions, and collaborate with people of other faiths without undermining proclamation.

scholarly journals Reporting on the Role of miRNAs and Affected Pathways on the Molecular Backbone of Ovarian Insufficiency: A Systematic Review and Critical Analysis Mapping of Future Research

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anna Rapani ◽  
Dimitra Nikiforaki ◽  
Dimitra Karagkouni ◽  
Konstantinos Sfakianoudis ◽  
Petroula Tsioulou ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Critical Analysis ◽  
Common Ground ◽  
Gene Expression Regulation ◽  
Individualized Medicine ◽  
Gene Set Enrichment Analysis ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Common Denominator ◽  
Ovarian Insufficiency ◽  
The Common

Ovarian insufficiency is identified as a perplexing entity in the long list of pathologies impairing fertility dynamics. The three distinct classifications of ovarian insufficiency are poor ovarian response, premature ovarian insufficiency/failure, and advanced maternal age, sharing the common denominator of deteriorated ovarian reserve. Despite efforts to define clear lines among the three, the vast heterogeneity and overlap of clinical characteristics renders their diagnosis and management challenging. Lack of a consensus has prompted an empirically based management coupled by uncertainty from the clinicians’ perspective. Profiling of patients in the era of precision medicine seems to be the way forward, while the necessity for a novel approach is underlined. Implicating miRNAs in the quest for patient profiling is promising in light of their fundamental role in cellular and gene expression regulation. To this end, the current study sets out to explore and compare the three pathophysiologies—from a molecular point of view—in order to enable profiling of patients in the context of in vitro fertilization treatment and enrich the data required to practice individualized medicine. Following a systematic investigation of literature, data referring to miRNAs were collected for each patient category based on five included studies. miRNA–target pairs were retrieved from the DIANA-TarBase repository and microT-CDS. Gene and miRNA annotations were derived from Ensembl and miRbase. A subsequent gene-set enrichment analysis of miRNA targets was performed for each category separately. A literature review on the most crucial of the detected pathways was performed to reveal their relevance to fertility deterioration. Results supported that all three pathophysiologies share a common ground regarding the affected pathways, naturally attributed to the common denominator of ovarian insufficiency. As evidenced, miRNAs could be employed to explore the fine lines and diverse nature of pathophysiology since they constitute invaluable biomarkers. Interestingly, it is the differentiation through miRNAs and not through the molecular affected pathways that corresponds to the three distinctive categories. Alarming discrepancies among publications were revealed, pertaining to employment of empirical and arbitrary criteria in categorizing the patients. Following bioinformatic analysis, the final step of the current study consisted of a critical analysis of the molecular data sourced, providing a clear and unique insight into the physiological mechanisms involved. It is our intention to contribute to mapping future research dedicated to ovarian insufficiency and to help researchers navigate the overwhelming information published in molecular studies.

Hotspots in Psychology – 2020 Edition

2020 ◽  
Vol 228 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-2
Author(s):  
Michael Bošnjak ◽  
Nadine Wedderhoff
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Research Synthesis ◽  
Synthesis Methods ◽  
Common Denominator ◽  
The Common ◽  
Meta Analyses

Abstract. This editorial gives a brief introduction to the six articles included in the fourth “Hotspots in Psychology” of the Zeitschrift für Psychologie. The format is devoted to systematic reviews and meta-analyses in research-active fields that have generated a considerable number of primary studies. The common denominator is the research synthesis nature of the included articles, and not a specific psychological topic or theme that all articles have to address. Moreover, methodological advances in research synthesis methods relevant for any subfield of psychology are being addressed. Comprehensive supplemental material to the articles can be found in PsychArchives ( https://www.psycharchives.org ).

Motives of espionage against ones own country in the light of idiographic studies

2011 ◽  
Vol 42 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-4 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sebastian Michalak
Keyword(s):  
Common Sense ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Common Denominator ◽  
Methodological Problems ◽  
The Common

Motives of espionage against ones own country in the light of idiographic studies The money is perceived as the common denominator among people who have spied against their own country. This assumption is common sense and appears to be self-evident truth. But do we have any hard evidences to prove the validity of such a statement? What method could be applied to determine it? This article is a review of the motives behind one's resorting to spying activity which is a complex and multifarious process. I decided to present only the phenomenon of spying for another country. The studies on the motives behind taking up spying activity are idiographic in character. One of the basic methodological problems to be faced by the researchers of this problem is an inaccessibility of a control group.

The Problem of the Typology of Rationality in Muslim Culture

2019 ◽  
Vol 62 (6) ◽  
pp. 88-99
Author(s):  
Andrey A. Lukashev
Keyword(s):  
Modern Philosophy ◽  
Theoretical Basis ◽  
Theoretical Models ◽  
The Other ◽  
Common Denominator ◽  
Islamic Culture ◽  
The Common ◽  
Per Se ◽  
The One ◽  
Muslim Culture

The typology of rationality is one of major issues of modern philosophy. In an attempt to provide a typology to Oriental materials, a researcher faces additional problems. The diversity of the Orient as such poses a major challenge. When we say “Oriental,” we mean several cultures for which we cannot find a common denominator. The concept of “Orient” involves Arabic, Indian, Chinese, Turkish and other cultures, and the only thing they share is that they are “non-Western.” Moreover, even if we focus just on Islamic culture and look into rationality in this context, we have to deal with a conglomerate of various trends, which does not let us define, with full confidence, a common theoretical basis and treat them as a unity. Nevertheless, we have to go on trying to find common directions in thought development, so as to draw conclusions about types of rationality possible in Islamic culture. A basis for such a typology of rationality in the context of the Islamic world was recently suggested in A.V. Smirnov’s logic of sense theory. However, actual empiric material cannot always fit theoretical models, and the cases that do not fit the common scheme are interesting per se. On the one hand, examination of such cases gives an opportunity to specify certain provisions of the theory and, on the other hand, to define the limits of its applicability.

The Semantics of Evidentials

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah E. Murray
Keyword(s):  
Recent Work ◽  
Common Ground ◽  
Formal Semantics ◽  
Empirical Support ◽  
Propositional Content ◽  
Primary Data ◽  
Truth Conditional ◽  
The Common ◽  
Issue Content

This book gives a compositional, truth‐conditional, crosslinguistic semantics for evidentials set in a theory of the semantics for sentential mood. Central to this semantics is a proposal about a distinction between what propositional content is at‐issue, roughly primary or proffered, and what content is not‐at‐issue. Evidentials contribute not‐at‐issue content, more specifically what I will call a not‐at‐issue restriction. In addition, evidentials can affect the level of commitment a sentence makes to the main proposition, contributed by sentential mood. Building on recent work in the formal semantics of evidentials and related phenomena, the proposed semantics does not appeal to separate dimensions of illocutionary meaning. Instead, I argue that all sentences make three contributions: at‐issue content, not‐at‐issue content, and an illocutionary relation. At‐issue content is presented, made available for subsequent anaphora, but is not directly added to the common ground. Not‐at‐issue content directly updates the common ground. The illocutionary relation uses the at‐issue content to impose structure on the common ground, which, depending on the clause type (e.g., declarative, interrogative), can trigger further updates. Empirical support for this proposal comes from Cheyenne (Algonquian, primary data from the author’s fieldwork), English, and a wide variety of languages that have been discussed in the literature on evidentials.

Can Groups Assert That P?

2019 ◽  
pp. 326-344
Author(s):  
Deborah Tollefsen
Keyword(s):  
Common Ground ◽  
Speech Act ◽  
Single Individual ◽  
Constitutive Rule ◽  
The Past ◽  
Group Members ◽  
The Common ◽  
Declarative Statement ◽  
John Macfarlane

When a group or institution issues a declarative statement, what sort of speech act is this? Is it the assertion of a single individual (perhaps the group’s spokesperson or leader) or the assertion of all or most of the group members? Or is there a sense in which the group itself asserts that p? If assertion is a speech act, then who is the actor in the case of group assertion? These are the questions this chapter aims to address. Whether groups themselves can make assertions or whether a group of individuals can jointly assert that p depends, in part, on what sort of speech act assertion is. The literature on assertion has burgeoned over the past few years, and there is a great deal of debate regarding the nature of assertion. John MacFarlane has helpfully identified four theories of assertion. Following Sandy Goldberg, we can call these the attitudinal account, the constitutive rule account, the common-ground account, and the commitment account. I shall consider what group assertion might look like under each of these accounts and doing so will help us to examine some of the accounts of group assertion (often presented as theories of group testimony) on offer. I shall argue that, of the four accounts, the commitment account can best be extended to make sense of group assertion in all its various forms.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document