Jenna Headrick-Blog Post #5

1. There are three different actor-world relations that help people understand each other. First is the relation to something in the objective world where the total of all speech acts are taken as objective truths. Second is the relation to something in the social world where speech acts are interpersonal relations. Third is the relation to something in the subjective world where the totality of the speech act is subjective to the actor's past experiences in which they have privileged access. "Communicative action relies on a cooperative process of interpretation in which participants relate simultaneously to something in the objective, the social, and the subjective worlds." Put simply, two people trying to communicate use their three different worlds as an interpretive framework in which they can find a common ground to understand each other. The process to arrive at a mutual understanding generates situation definitions. In every day conversation "repair work" is done where "every new utterance is a test:" the words of the speaker are affirmed, modified, partly suspended or placed in question by the hearer. Every communicating action in the world goes through continual definition and redefinition in which the actors depend on the framework of their three worlds. Agreement of a speech act between actors is important to establish understanding. Habermas gives an example in the text of the communication between people and the potential for misunderstanding. He illustrates the scene of an older construction worker sending a younger worker to get beer and hurry back. If the younger worker simply went and understood the implications of the speech act the three worlds between the workers were common. But if the younger worker responded saying "Why?" or "I'm not thirsty!" or "Why should we stop now?" redefinition would have to take place. The younger worker would not have the past experiences that would commonly define his three worlds like that of the older worker. The older worker would have to illustrate the general norm and understanding that the workers always take a midmorning snack where they choose to enjoy beer. Furthermore, the older worker would have to explain to the younger worker the social norm that the low man on the totem pole fetches the beer without complaining. Redefinition between actors is essential when aiming to achieve understanding. Uncommon worlds often lead to misunderstandings, which often lead to many unfortunate consequences.
2. The lifeworld, from what I could grasp, is the set of norms, understandings, belief systems, and actions that a person acts from. "Communicative actors are always moving within the horizon of their lifeworld; they cannot step outside of it." I feel as if the lifeworld could be compared to a set of glasses specific to each person, which provides a subjective outlook on the rest of the world. The lifeworld, though being specific to each actor, provides a place where understanding is possible. "The structures of the lifeworld lay down the forms of the intersubjectivity of possible understanding." Both actors in the lifeworld are able to question or validate the other person's claim in order to define and redefine the situation to reach mutual understanding. The three components of the lifeworld are culture, society, and personality. Culture is the knowledge from which actors develop interpretations as they come to an understanding. Society is the orders through which actors regulate social groups and secure solidarity. And personality is the competences that enable an actor to reach different understandings and in the end develop their own identity.