Réponse :
Explications :
We communicate, that we share what unites us, and that we follow the differences that divide us. Dominic Walton notes that the twenty-first century is the century of coexistence in the sense of securing the conditions required for coexistence between different points of view, in a very small world in which individuals know everything, and one is not able to escape from it. Cultural diversity as an essential component of human rights is a new phenomenon, but its path is not. It is one of the roots of development and its importance for humankind is similar to the importance of biodiversity for nature. This raises the issue of identities, which includes interests and strategies and their symbolic expressions through the system of practices and ideas, which establishes a state of dialogue or tension between groups, a dialogue that establishes a dialectical relationship. Through which identity is explained at the level of social interactions formed for human relations, based on symbolic formats transmitted across the network between individuals.
Our study aims to understand the link established by the problem of cultural diversity with identity in light of the ongoing and complex dialectics of communication. Focusing on Algeria, it is in a situation where there are many cultures and identities. In a world infused with media, communications and technologies, how is the way to prevent media and communication from becoming tools of conflict and hatred, and direct them to coexistence and preserve cultural privacy.
Dialectics of communication:
Communicative verb:
Jürgen Habermas understands the communicative verb as: “A pattern of action resides in the world of life for all people, resisting an invasion that can penetrate this world through the penetration of bureaucratic and economic rationality, and then provides the third sphere (the public sphere) with the principle of having actors engaging in organized interaction (Armando Salvatore :). It is no longer a matter of the necessity of communication or the availability of the necessary capabilities for that, but rather the presence of the actors and their contribution to the success of the communicative act, Habermas also says: "Communication has become the only voice capable of unifying a world that has lost all of its references. The contradiction in which we are placed "(Hassan Mossadak). Our awareness of the importance of communication is an awareness of the reality of ourselves and the nature of our interactions, and the appropriate way to achieve human activities, no matter how many and varied, and we find that modern societies resorted to attaching the central value to communication to address the problems that resulted from their basic options, and humankind held hope for the age of communication. However, at the same time, we became suffering from it as a non-communication: the irony is that the many means of communication canceled the communication and changed its characteristics, as the modern person suffers from frustration, isolation and incoherence in the social fabric, and from isolation, alienation and values subject to extinction.
One of the basic features of the theory of rational communication is the necessity of dialogue as it is beneficial to man in all different areas of life: at home and at work and to fulfill his needs, lunch and soul. And dialogue in this sense is necessary for him with others as well as with himself. It also improves and belongs to this communicative intuition that exists implicit and inherent in every human being with his linguistic and cultural affiliation, but it must be subject to critical rationality. For Habermas and Karl Apple, knowledge is possible only from the conditions of rationality of communication, and communication is only possible from the human use of discourse. This rationality of communication is based on the ethics of the discussion and the proof asserting the commitment before any discussion and agreeing in advance to the criteria of speech logic and its characteristics (honesty, validity, validity, accuracy, responsibility and reasonableness). All of them are conditions of rational communication, which means that rejecting the principle of proof means immediate withdrawal from the group of rational beings (Hassan Mossadak). We find that modern means of communication, including social networks, have caused a major break in communication despite the availability of all appropriate technologies for communication and this is an affirmation that technological determinism does not represent an effective tool in connecting our societies and the communication of individuals among them, on the contrary, has created us with great social isolation, so technology Present but miss the speech.
With regard to the communication philosophy, discourse cannot be considered merely a reflection of a shared awareness and a clearly defined ideology.
I hope i helped, have a good one
