In reading the title of Shannon and Weaver's chapter, I could not help but approach it with a wary eye, looking for the first instance of mathematical jargon. Although logarithms and coefficients have not been a part of my curriculum thus far, I am pleased to find that some of Shannon and Weaver's theoretical basis of how messages might be lost as they travel through the transmitter is not too difficult to understand. There is logic to their analysis especially when it comes to the redundancy of the English language and freedom of expression (104). This aspect of their work, although a rather short section, was the most interesting to me because it makes me question the variance in our everyday conversations as fluent English speakers. There are certainly particular phrases that can be linked to an individual (their catch phrase or something of that sort). To have fifty percent of the English language redundant (basically little or no freedom in the choosing of those words), is a difficult notion to wrap my head around. The problem as mentioned above (possible incongruity between the message initially transmitted and the resulting phrase), is similar to Weiner’s.
This group of philosophers found that noise which can blur the message is a major factor behind communication problems (especially via devices such as the telegraph, radio and telephone). I was relieved to find that the bourgeoisie do not appear to be the primary culprits behind this mess. They are the perpetrators in regards to the mechanization of man and the degradation of individual human beings to the role of mindless machine operators (16). This is a reflection of Weiner’s inner Marxist. Human beings as creators of machines and communication devices and as beings that make communication necessary play a central role in Weiner’s thesis (7). I understand the parallels between machines and humans as receptors and transmitters of information; however, I do not think that I am comparable to the laptop on which I am typing. I choose the words and messages I want to convey and the only feedback, would be a red line indicating a spelling error. On a different note, I think that these three philosophers’ fascination with hearing and language and the biological and mathematical components that allow human beings to communicate are indicative of an important theory about the human condition: communication is an essential aspect of our lives humans. Weiner in particular articulates the necessity (and thus detrimental effect of a problem via hearing or language). Without communication and the ability to convey messages (no matter how warped at times), there is little variation between machines and us. I hope that if technology reaches a point where machines are nearly the same as humans (even in regards to feelings) that we do not manipulate or oppress this creation, as we have been our fellow man.