Apart from some cursory mentions of Darwin and his contributions to theory building as applied to communication, most of my exposure to him has been from a natural science perspective. I did a quick search on several communication related databases and only turned up a few really relevant articles. One article really caught my attention though and I want to quote a few lines from it to you.

Kaplan (1987) noted that “Although we know that verbal language has some special features which differentiate it from nonverbal signaling systems, there is very little empirical basis for the distinctions drawn between zoosemiotic [animal] and anthroposemiotic [human] communication forms” (p. 117). So, how do we rationalize these “special features”? I guess they’re just extra parts that were leftover from the evolutionary process. Kaplan continued, having noted that “As in animals, one of the salient characteristics of human status display is that much of it centers upon mating and marriage” (p. 119). Suddenly, because we seek a mate or offer parental care, as do many animals – we must draw the conclusion that we’ve originated from the same cell, and therefore share many of the same family communication characteristics as the animals down the street sitting in the zoo.

I’ll wrap this up with one more illustration from Kaplan’s article. Conflict has obvious implications to communication, but I’m willing to bet you’ve not heard of the link between warfare, communication, and Darwin. According to Kaplan, one alternative to going to war for noble reasons (patriotism, courage, heroism) is to fight in order to make an “investment in status communication” (p. 125). According to Kaplan, men are likely to volunteer for war duty if they perceive to have a better selection of a mate as a result. Is it just me, or doesn’t this sound like a bit of a stretch?

OK, enough already. I’m going to continue to research how my field is making accommodations for Darwin, what are you going to do? Just be careful, you may risk getting Expelled.

Reference
Kaplan, H. (1987). Human communication and contemporary evolutionary theory.
     Research on Language & Social Interaction, 20, 79-139.

The other interesting claim which the USA Today article makes is that evangelicals are not very involved in politics (at least this is the perception).  Given the purpose of the manifesto, will a more theologically grounded movement result in more political involvement or less?  And how do those outside the movement think about this?

But, alas, it is not over. Barack Obama’s former pastor, the Rev. Wright, and a new manifesto of evangelicals and politics (soon to be made public), religion and its relationship to politics and citizenship has once again called for the nation’s attention.

Wright’s speech at the National Press Club and his previous comments have suggested that there is a deep contradiction between religious conscience/principles and politics. As Wright has said, Obama distanced himself from Wright because the presidential candidate is, after all, a “politician.” Religious principles, at least of Wright’s kind, can cost the young senator from Illinois the presidential election.

Now evangelicals have written a soon to be released manifesto lamenting the current state of affairs for evangelicals in politics and suggesting the necessary remedies. The political landscape has changed for evangelical Christians and, once again, they must adjust (or is it re-adjust?)

This is not new. Since the fall of the Roman Empire, Christians have had constantly to defend their political and public involvement. The question which now begs for an answer is whether or not evangelical Christians have anything new to offer to today’s pluralistic American democracy that other groups do not already offer. Just what is the contribution which evangelical Christians make to today’s politics that is different than that offered by non-Christian conservatives or libertarians or non-Christian democrats on the left?

If this new manifesto is simply a broadening of the evangelical political agenda to include issues which individuals and groups on the “left” already support, then it may be safe to say that the “religious right” and its more moderate evangelical counterpart are being diluted.

Is there a new “religious right” that is needed? Is there such a thing as a “neo” evangelical given the penchant of the latter to be a political syncretist?

So, let me ask again- what is a citizen? What does this term imply? Are there any essential requirements to citizenship regardless of the country or era? In other words, are there important characteristics that any citizen should possess at all times and in all places? If Aristotle is right that fire burn the same in all places, then this begs the question whether citizenship is the same in all places as well. Is being a good citizen the same in Iraq as it is in the United States?

You will notice that we have added the term “good” to citizen. What is the standard for being a “good” citizen? Is it the same at all times and in all places? Or are there fundamental differences between good citizenship in different parts of the world? And, we should ask, what is citizenship in a more interconnected and global world? Is there, should there be, such a thing as a citizen of planet earth?

weCitizens is a blog created for all of us citizens in the 21st century. It’s purpose is to help us think about the current trends that affect our ability to participate and fulfill our duties as citizens of our countries and planet earth. weCitizens considers politics, religion, media, music, entertainment and all other things- as time allows.

But deep thinking is just the first step. weCitizens is also meant to help all of us make positive steps toward improving our lives as well as those of others. Our task is to think and grow so that we may benefit our homes, neighborhoods, towns and cities, countries, and ultimately planet earth.

The ultimate goal is to help good people be good citizens and to help good citizens become good people.

This is a big task but a very worthy one. And we hope to contribute to it in some small way.

So look around and enjoy. We are just getting started!

Carpe Diem.