The theoretical fit of exploring information operations and communication actions

At present, the rapid development of the Internet has put forward new research topics on the theory of traditional social actions. First of all, the scene of social actions has undergone profound changes, and "network digital scenes" have become a new field for social operations. Secondly, the extension of the main body of social operations has greatly expanded, and non -human actors have also entered the ranks of social actors. Some scholars put forward the concept of information action with reference to Habermas. The information action is the Internet as a medium, which is a form of information flow. Information action encodes and translates into information flow. The concept of information action has a strong explanation of the phenomenon of communication such as the Internet of Things, social virtual reality and artificial intelligence. Some scholars believe that speech behavior is an information action. In speech behavior, the separation of human and language symbols is similar to the relationship between people and computer languages, people and computer program instructions, and human and artificial intelligence. Habermas used the theory of speech behavior of learning to build a theory of communication action. The relationship between comparative information operations and communication actions needs to determine whether the two are theoretical at the level of speech behavior.

Generally consolidated prerequisite

In Habermas's theoretical ideas, the "general assumption premise" provides "general assumptions." Coruism helps us establish the general conditions required for understanding, and the purpose of Habermas's theory of communication is to realize understanding, so Habermas uses language use as the initial conditions of the theory of communication. The most basic meaning of understanding is that the two sides explain the expression of a language in the same way. This requires the two parties to achieve a certain standardized recognition of the background of the communication, and on this basis, the interaction between the two parties will be realized. However, many times, the two parties do not fully realize each other's understanding. The words are unsatisfactory, misleading expressions, unrealistic narratives, and inconsistent narrative habits, etc., often hinder the path of speech behavior to understanding. Once misunderstandings, the premise that the ability to meet the effectiveness of exchanges will be questioned by both parties. In order to save the effectiveness of exchanges, both parties may conduct negotiation on the definition of the situation. The result of the negotiation may be to re -introduce the exchange behavior of exchanges, or to replace the understanding of debate or strategic behavior due to the failure of negotiation. In Habermas's theoretical vision, negotiation failure needs to be tried to avoid. He tried to use communication actions to lay a theoretical path to understand from speech behavior.

In Habermas, the speech behavior has some kind of "overwhelming force", and this "overwhelming force" has caused speakers to automatically become "subject". The mandatoryness in speech behavior is reflected in, and the speaker's own words implies unconscious assumptions, these assumptions are the normative conditions of understanding. Both parties in the relationship will assume that each other knows each other's expression validity requirements. The recognition of verbal validity requirements will create a sharing situation of communication. Exchanges in shared situations can verify whether their respective validity requirements are met. Conditions to achieve effective communication include: grammatical statement, sincere intentions, and discourse specifications. Once the expression of words and the implied expression tendency can bring authenticity, sincerity, and true understanding, then it can be said that the exchanges between the two parties can be used to achieve the effectiveness of exchanges between the two sides. Grammar, statement, and intentions represent the general validity basis in the sense of general academics. When the speaker spreads with words, the feedback from the heir determines whether the communicationman can achieve the requirements of its communication effectiveness. If the recipient accepts the speech behavior of the communicator and recognizes the effectiveness of the communication symbol structure, then the two parties will reach the consensus of the correctness of grammar, the authenticity of statement, and the sincerity of intention.

The theory of Habameas' communication action distinguishes the language as a structure and a process of processes. Language is an expression of a regular system, and all expression can be regarded as the elements of language. In this sense, information action is also one of the forms of language expression. The participants of the interaction are entered the situation of interaction as the main body of the ability to speak, and the exchanges in the context are reflected in the two aspects of speech expression and response to speech expression. The typical forms of information action (such as online love, online fighting, online games, etc.) have obvious expression and response words. Simply absorbing the information action in the words, and did not solve the general language problem of information operations, that is, the "general condition" that Habermas wants to confirm. The elements in the information action with obvious linguistic behaviorism and communication information transmission model characteristics. The transmission and reception of information is reflected in the encoding and decoding of symbols in the transmission model. The summary of the symbol dissemination model of the communication operation cannot achieve theoretical correlation from accidental conditions to prerequisites. This model ignores the subjective significance of the communicator, and cannot explain the meaning of the meaning of the relationship and the subjective recognition of the effectiveness of communication. The direct theoretical association of information operations and communication actions requires the intuitive understanding of the subject's subject.

Infosomal rule consciousness

The information action observes the experience phenomenon in the form of information communication, and the content of the processing is a sense of realistic realism. The acting acts requires actors to understand the pre -constructed symbolic reality. Information action forms perception experience, and communication action forms interaction experience. Cause and effect analysis of perception experience, understanding of interaction experience can only resort to an interpretation of meaning. For interpretation, external social structures are not key elements to realize understanding. The deep structure and rules of symbolic composition are the inevitable carrier of meaning. The symbolic expression of information operations under the special network situation involves only the surface structure of action. If the constituent rules of the symbolic structure are needed, the "intuitional awareness" of the main body of the ability to say is needed. This requires that the actors can not only understand the content of the words passed in the form of information flow, but also understand the implicit knowledge behind the language rules system. The awareness of the rules of the actor play a role as an evaluation mechanism (for example, the speaker's evaluation of whether the statement conforms to grammar). The grammar phenomenon in the information action presents a diversified pattern, and different groups have different constructive strategies for the syntax of network language. The rule consciousness in the information action requires the action of the action subject to have the ability to cross -clarify communication, and this ability has encountered a technical barrier at the calculation language level. Generally, it is difficult to understand the principle of symbolization structure behind the code rules and algorithm logic. The lack of a generalized potential of a phrase in the information operation, which is not enough to form a significance interpretation structure of general cognition. Paradoxically, the form of artificial intelligence such as the game program, composition robot, etc. can not only be used as an information action to create information flow, but also form a structural "knowledge" of algorithm logic. However, the mastery of artificial intelligence on calculating the "sentence structure" is based on the code program written by the subject of human behavior, and it cannot be said that artificial intelligence has the awareness of the rules of the actor. Artificial intelligence forms' consequences and statement coherents cannot form a "correct" behavioral specification. The accurate grasp of behavioral specifications is the basis for intuitive evaluation of the subject of behavior.

Effective requirements

Habermas has set up limited conditions for communication qualifications for associated operations. First, the propositions stated by the speaker should meet the prerequisite conditions of the existence, that is, the authenticity of the statement. Second, the speaker must have the ability to express personal intent. Third, speakers must have the ability to implement speech. The recognized words need to be consistent with the norms that have been accepted, and can point to the value orientation that both parties follow in the relationship between the action -understanding. In the example of intelligent decision -making such as autonomous driving, artificial intelligence is based on setting the calculation logic for computing logic generated by the set program or machine self -learning. Intelligent decisions meet the first two conditions for communication qualifications. The decision -making basis provided by artificial intelligence meets the requirements of the authenticity of statement, and can also show clear words. However, the decision -making of artificial intelligence does not meet the requirements of implementation of words. Although artificial intelligence information action can effectively express the standard parameters set by the system, it is impossible to dynamically present the negotiations between the actors and the situation on value orientation in the decision -making, nor can it be activated and standardized by the implementation of speech behavior. Habermas uses Wittgenstein's language philosophy to regulate the situation as a key factor derived. The most important thing in communication operations is not the presence of speech, expression function and interpersonal interaction attributes related to it are the core elements that define the communication action.

What Habermaz wants to realize the use of the rule of reconstruction to show the rules system in which the main body is in the context. In the contextual rules system, the statement with the qualifications of communication is capable of explaining. The interpretation of the subject dialogue is achieved by identifying similar associations between the same language. In the information operation, the non -human subject does not share the same language as the human subject. The information action of non -human subjects uses code language, and the information action of the human subject is still the daily language in the sense of general language. During the interaction process, the encoding is encoded into the form of information flow. Non -human subjects and human subjects are difficult to build a bridge to explain the interpretation of discourse explanations in the family similarity of language in the information action, which makes the subject's ability to break the ability in the situation. Therefore, the unified situation rules of information operations cannot be established, and the general functions of communication operations cannot be guaranteed. Therefore, Habermaus's requirements for the effectiveness of communication -authenticity, sincerity, and correctness cannot be met in all information operations.

(Author Unit: Institute of Journalism and Communication, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences)

Source: China Social Science Network-Journal of Social Sciences of China

Author: Zhao Kang

- END -