[comp.society] Blending Oral and Written Traditions by Electronic mail.

ed298-ak@violet.berkeley.edu (Edouard Lagache) (05/07/87)

- -
	Sorry to disturb this interesting exchange, but the battle between
   Written and Oral traditions was settled some centuries ago.  Unfortunately,
   the basis for that change was primarily pragmatic rather than intellectual.
   If you are interested in some of the arguments on both sides, you can
   find some of it in Plato's Dialogues!

	What I find most interesting is how Electronic mail has recaptured
   some of the nicer aspects of oral exchange while permitting the reflection
   of written discourse.  In some sense E-mail permits conversations to occur
   in "slow-motion", permitting all parties to take the time to understand
   each others position before replying.  Thus in some sense, we have a
   chance to enjoy the best of both worlds!

	I would be interested in what people think about that!

   Edouard Lagache 		School of Education,U.C. Berkeley

mmc@well.UUCP (Matthew McClure) (05/08/87)

Edouard Lagache writes:

>	What I find most interesting is how Electronic mail has recaptured
>   some of the nicer aspects of oral exchange while permitting the reflection
>   of written discourse.  In some sense E-mail permits conversations to occur
>   in "slow-motion", permitting all parties to take the time to understand
>   each others position before replying.  Thus in some sense, we have a
>   chance to enjoy the best of both worlds!

I agree; I also appreciate the advantage of a written record,
since my memory is so often faulty, especially if I'm on the
receiving end of a long chain of information or steps in an
argument.

Matthew McClure

MJackson.Wbst@Xerox.COM (Mark Jackson) (05/13/87)

And if one isn't up for reading Plato's /Dialogues/, or wants a more
contemporary view, let me suggest Neil Postman's /Amusing Ourselves to
Death/.  Postman traces the history of the displacement of the oral by
the written tradition, with particular attention to the effect on how
matters of public policy are publicly debated.

(The book is *really* about how first rapid communications, then
photography, then television have caused the "entertainment model" to
replace the "discourse model" as the framework by which *all* public
events are evaluated.  Aside from one or two parenthetical comments, the
only mention of computers is quoted in full in my message [Re: Examples
from Scandinavia] of a few minutes ago to Steve Barber.  But the
background on how the medium is the message [to coin a phrase] is, in my
view, essential to the "computer literacy" discussion.)

Mark

taylor@hplabsc.UUCP (05/16/87)

"Slow motion conversations" are not new to E-mail, but it does provide an
interesting enhancement.  Conversations at a distance before the advent of
the telephone required paper mail, and a "man of letters" spent much of his
time in literary conversations.  But the effort of including more than a few
correspondents quickly became prohibitive.  With the broadcast facility of
net news, this impediment has been shattered.

Reducing the cost of adding correspondents has made it easier to involve
larger groups in the conversation, but it has simultaneously destroyed the
selectiveness of private literary exchange.  Neither has the technology
provided any inducements to reflection.  Newsgroup partitioning and the
shear volume of electronic mail has provided some insulation, but the
exchange between correspondents of net.bizarre and the "net-police" have
shown that the problem does exist, as does the continual battle over new
newsgroups and appropriate posting.

Still, there are benefits which should not be discounted.  This current
conversation is certainly an example, and many others can be found.
-- 
Robert Reed, Tektronix CAE Systems Division, bobr@zeus.TEK