Pagpapayo bago sumapit ang labanan sa Imus

My brother katipuneros and beloved countrymen:

I do believe that God is with is in this fight against Spain.
Although our first attempt was a failure, God spared my life so that I can be with you and
continue the fight. God knows that we have only one purpose: to free
our country from bondage.
Our failure inBacood was a blessing in disguise because had not these friars heard the shots in Bacood, they would not have left the hacienda nor would they have
surrendered.
Neither could we have obtained that you and Colonel Jose Tagle,
your brave leader, were able to get . These arms shall be used in our
future battles. The dexterity and skill which you had shown in this
fight is an indication of your...
Thank God, it did not proceed at once to Imus.
Now, we have still time to prepare for its coming tomorrow.
So, while we have time,let us start moving. While some men must break
down one support of the bridge, the others should build the pillboxes.
The enemy might come anytime now.
Thank you very much.

-Emilio Aguinaldo


Humans are story-telling creatures. We create our social worlds through the stories we construct.

In persuasion, one can use this nature to be successful in achieving one's
goal. The Narrative Paradigm of Walter Fisher emphasizes the nature of
man to tell stories to create identity and the like. Plus, how to use
this in persuading people.

The speech of Emilio Aguinaldo “ Pagpapayo bago sumapit ang labanan sa Imus .“
Emilio delivered this speech presenting it into a story. He used their
experiences in persuading his fellowmen to fight for what they believe
in. It revealed his character; a person determined to fight for the
love of his country. He also did not lose hope despite the obstacles
they have been experiencing.

The speech passed the test of narrative coherence and narrative fidelity.
The story in the speech was truthful and expressed humanity.

But Aguinaldo's speech can be also an example of Aristotle's theory The Rhetoric.
Since the speech was also based on logos (logical),ethos (ethical), pathos ( emotional).


Aguinaldo persuaded his fellowmen to not to lose hope and to
keep on fighting till the very end. He also included that even though
their first attempt was a failure, it was not a hindrance. And the fact
that he was given a second chance to live is a reason to fight for what
they believed in.

Indeed, because of the powerful combination of elements essential for persuasion, Emilio Aguinaldo's speech was one of the speeches that moved a nation.

Itanim sa Senado!

Pichay vs. Oreta

Pichay..

People often make fun of his name. But it is an advantage for a politician like him since it is easier for people to remember him. But is it enough?

In Elaboration Likelihood Model of Richard Petty and John Cacioppo, there are two mental routes to change a listener. Petty labeled the two cognitive processes the central route and the peripheral route (Griffin).

The central route involves message elaboration. Elaboration is “the extent to which a person carefully thinks about issue-relevant arguments contained in a persuasive communication.”
The peripheral route offers a shorthand way to accept or reject a message “without any thinking about the attributes of the issue or the object of consideration (Griffin).”

In the political ad of Prospero Pichay, people easily rejected this without dwelling deeper to the issues related to it. The attention of the people was drawn to Pichay not on the issues he presented.

Unlike the political ad of Tessie Aquino-Oreta, it was about the status quo of the children in the country regarding education. Education in our country remains a privilege where in fact it is a right.

I had a difficult time in spotting a political ad that falls under the central route. It is because almost all of the political ads belong to the peripheral route. I cannot blame politicians in using such strategy, since their goal is to grab attention. And they are given a short period of time to be remembered.

Their ad may fall under peripheral routes or not, what is more important is the service these people has to offer to our country.

Please Sir.... Please...

"Sir for the past few months that I have been working here, I have learned so much.I love this job that is why I have been giving my heart and time for giving the best for the good of our company.

Sir I know that you have been abiding on the rules and policies. You have been just doing your job.I really understand that. I am also very thankful in having you as my boss and my mentor.But sir,as time passes by I've been having thoughts if you would be considerate enough to give me a higher compensation.It would be a very lovely reward. Sir, can you be kind enough to share with me your generosity?"

Whew! I had difficulty composing these "persuasive words"(hope they are convincing enough)! The Social Judgement Theory by Muzafer Sherif tells that a person has three attitude zones:Acceptance, Rejection, Noncommitment. And a person categorizes a statement depending on his anchor point and on how he is involved on a topic or situation.

In this case, I assumed that my boss' anchor point is the office's policy that no increase shall be given to part-time employees. So acknowledging that fact might help me get things on track. Then my next strategy was to say statements that fall under his latitude of acceptance. By saying that I love my job and I have been giving my heart and my best for the good of the company. I think it would be helpful statements in convincing him.Plus, telling him that it would be a lovely reward would convey him the message that I wasn't getting the things that I believe I deserve.

Through the concepts of the theory, I hope my proposal would have a favorable response.

TEXT NAH!!

My grandparents say that their generation is very different from ours. Hey! It is the 21st century. Life is really different. This is because of what technology brings.

Everything is fast changing even how a relationship develops.

Social Information Processing Theory by Joseph Walther presents the development of a relationship through a medium like computer.

But since the Philippines is the texting capital of the world. We Filipinos use our cell phones as a medium in communicating than computers.

I have a friend in high school.She had a boyfriend.The guy was also our classmate. But when we were in school they would act as strangers to each other. I do not why.Maybe they do not want to be teased in school.

It all started with a friendly text message from the guy. Their so called “friendship” flourished and became a romantic relationship. They never had a face to face conversation.But because they see each other everyday, her uncertainty about her boyfriend and their relationship decreases.

My friend could consume 300 peso worth of load in just 4 days!(that time unlimited texting was not available) I remember my friend saving her boyfriend's messages in her cell phone's outbox. And sometimes she would just write them on a piece of paper because they were so many!

Their relationship did not last that long. After 6 months of exchanging text messages, their relationship came to an end.

Their relationship were like any other relationships.But the only difference is instead of communicating face to face, they communicated through a medium.

I like how Joseph Walther compare face to face communication and Computer Mediated Communication as a gulp and sip of communication.

When you communicate face to face, you are as if having big gulps in quenching your thirst for information to the other person. While in CMC,you are using a straw.

Based on my friend's story, I can say that their relationship was enveloped with mystery.Within those months, they shared parts of themselves with each other.This made their relationship exciting.

Technology indeed brings a lot of possibilities in many aspects of our lives.

It is simply amazing.

Jeepney ride

Lunel is an Architecture student here in UP Mindanao. He is slender with a brown complexion. He is smart, nice, and very funny. He was my classmate way back in elementary.

Lunel and I were not really that close but we were friends. We went to different high schools and never heard from each other. I could barely remember the last time we had a conversation. Until, college came in.

At first, I was hesitant to talk to him because its been a while since we talked. But it was easy for me to be comfortable talking to him since he treats me like we were in elementary.

Last week, I was about to go out the dormitory when he came. We smiled at each other. Then he asked me “San ka?” “May klase ako sa CSM.” I said. He asked me again “Kumain ka na?” I said “Hindi pa eh, samahan mo nalang ako.” Then after we had breakfast. After we ate, we walked under my pink umbrella on the way to CSM. It was a long walk and the perfect time to catch up on things.

He was the best person to conduct an experiment to. I am not a Biology student so don't worry, I won't dissect him like a frog! I will conduct a communication experiment regarding how will I be able to create a strategy that will increase our intimacy.
This is in line with the Uncertainty Reduction Theory by Charles Berger.

I was lucky that Lunel and I were getting closer a week before our professor asked us to conduct an experiment. It was easier for me.

Last January 26. It was Friday afternoon, I was excited to go home. I was waiting for the jeepney to go when Lunel came in and sat beside me. It was another perfect chance to have a conversation since the travel will be a bit far.

Our conversation defeated boredom! I enjoyed our talk because I learned so much from him. The difference between Fine Arts and Architectural Arts. And so much more.

After we got off the jeepney from UP to ADDU. Together, we rode on another jeep going home since our houses are just a few kilometers apart. We became that close that I was not ashamed to borrow 4 pesos from him!haha Since I only have 3 peso coins and a One hundred peso bill on my wallet. He was very generous to lend me a few coins.

My jeepney ride with Lunel was a memorable one. Not because I borrowed money from him! But because our closeness was now a level higher. My experiment was indeed a success!

People are People

Liars go to hell. Is this true? If this is true, then why do people lie? That is the big question!
I bet Interpersonal Deception Theory of David Buller and Judee Burgoon can be a helpful tool in finding answers.

I remember when I was in first year high school. My father talked to me about a very serious matter: ARMANDO. He was the boy that my parents thought was my boyfriend! I was very nervous then because even though he was not my boyfriend, we shared something special. I was really afraid that my father would be very angry. I remember I was giving senseless answers. Then my father told me “...anak, ang trust parang crystal ball, kapag yan nabasag ay hindi mo na mababalik sa dati.Mabalik mo man pero may lamat na. Kaya ikaw ingatan mo yang pagtitiwala ko sa iyo.” Those words were tattooed on my mind and in my heart.

Since then all my interpersonal relationships were based on trust. But I admit that telling the truth all the time is a very difficult thing to do.

After discussing Interpersonal Deception Theory, I realized that big or small lies can greatly affect a relationship.

I have difficulty in detecting if the person I have a relationship with is telling the truth or not since trust is the foundation of most of my interpersonal relationhsips. Nonverbal cues can be very helpful in spotting a deceptive message but I often rely on my instincts. Though I know that my instincts are not accurate.The 18 propositons of Buller and Burgoon were all true but can be applicable in different situations.

When I am not telling the truth, I usually drop the important details(concealment) and my statements are uncertain and vague (uncertainty and vagueness). My statements are like this because I don't want my answers to lead to more questions and so on.

I agree that in deception, the sender and/or receiver engage in strategic deception. May you be a sender or the receiver,you participate on the interaction. The theory is a complicated one. Though Buller and Burgoon presented the theory the best way they can, I appreciate more the simple model of Steven McCormack because it simplified the complexities of the subject.

I am confused if I agree with Bella De Paulo's critique or not. De Paulo and her colleagues fail to spot an explanatory glue(Griffin) they were looking for. However, it is true that Buller and Burgoon offered multiple mechanisms to link the many variables that affect interpersonal deception(Griffin).

I think communication scholars are relatively silent about its moral implications because it is part of the nature of communication. But ethical stands exist, since not all of us share the same religious beliefs, I would require to others Immanuel Kant's categorical imperative. As for me, I would pick Augustine's Divine Will because I value my religious convictions.

All I can say that why make life so complicated if you can make it simple? Lying cannot do you any good. So abstain from doing it!

Going up or down?

“You're invading my personal space!” sounds familiar right? Maybe you have heard this from someone caught in a situation where his personal space was threatened.

What is personal space anyway? Burgoon defines personal space as the “invisible,variable volume of space surrounding an individual that defines the individual's preferred distance from others”(Griffin).
Proxemics is part of communication. Illinios Institute of Technology anthropologist Edward Hall coined the term proxemics to refer to the study of people's use of space as a special elaboration of culture(Griffin).

We had a fun activity in class last Thursday. We were asked to act as if we were in a real life situation, in this case in an elevator. It was not realistic though but I really enjoyed it. It was funny how my classmates and I behaved. We were like a bunch of children playing their favorite game. In that kind of situation, there was one observation that when a person or a group of people stepped inside that limited space, they preferred to stay at the corners. It was because they want to keep their personal bubbles. After the activity we discussed EVT.

Expectancy Violation Thoery by Judee Burgoon has been used to explain and predict attitudes and behaviors in a wide variety of communication context(Griffin).

Through that theory, I have learned the whys and hows of our demeanors inside a limited space like in an elevator. I have also learned that people value their personal spaces but they tend to ignore other's personal bubbles.
Relationship,culture,gender,and age are some of the determinants of how near or far a person is from another when they interact.

However, though people try so hard to keep their distances, there are still instances where their expected interaction range is violated. When someone violates another's expectancy, whether the act was negative or positive, the person(whose expectancy was violated) examines if he have gained or lost something during the said interaction. The person's reaction depends on whether he liked the act of violation or not.

The thoery of Judee Burgoon may not be applicable to all situations. It is a case-to-case basis. Nevertheless, it added flavor to the theory.

So guys do not be afraid to take risks in communicating, violating one's expectancy may lead to a good outcome. Unless you hear that person say “You're invading my personal space!'” then you know the next thing to do. Keep your distance!