Communication is the trait that brings humanity together with the human race. The ability to share, define, and collaborate on ideas with others is what creates society. Since the dawn of time, influential figures have emphasized the importance of this process. Plato, a Greek philosopher from around 400 BCE, was a prolific author who defined many of the key early philosophical ideas. In his work Plato's Republic, Plato is the author of Book VII: The Allegory of the Cave. This allegory describes the nature of education and the duty of those who find greater truth to return to the less educated and share their discoveries: "It is therefore our task as founders to compel the better nature to achieve to the study that we said before. most importantly, to make the ascent and see the good. But when they have succeeded and looked hard enough, we must not allow them to do what is permitted to them today...Stand there and refuse to go back down to the prisoners in the cave and share their labors and their honors, which they are worth less or more”. This concept of collaborative communication is further explained in a work by John Stuart Mill, a 19th-century English philosopher who synthesized ideas from the Enlightenment and Romantic eras into his own philosophical efforts. In this work, On Liberty of Thought and Discussion, from On Liberty, Mill emphasizes the need to engage with all ideas in efforts to create a more complete truth; “…There is a more common case than either; when contradictory doctrines, instead of being one true and the other false, share the truth between them; and the nonconforming opinion is necessary to furnish the remainder of the truth, of which the received doctrine embodies only a part.” A more contemporary author, David Bohm, a 20th-century theoretical physicist who later in life turned to philosophy, further develops this concept of collaborative truth in On Communication, from On Dialogue: "Thus, in a dialogue, each person does not attempt to share certain ideas or information that are already known to them. Rather, we can say that the two people create something in common, that is, they create something new together.” Across this broad timeline of philosophical development, we see each of the influential figures sing the praises of “collaborative truth,” the creation of higher understanding through the exploration and creation of new information. This collaborative truth is key to how humanity and societies are unique to humans. Although each author proclaims this idea, I argue that each of these men is hypocritical in applying the ideas they hope to propagate. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get the original essay Plato was born into an “aristocratic and distinguished family.” This gave him the financial and political comfort to explore his philosophical interests in depth. Plato had a wide circle of influential figures in his life, including his teacher Socrates, and the ability to travel and engage in dialogue with prominent political and philosophical figures of his time. Later in his life, Plato founded the Academy. The Academy was a space for in-depth investigation of scientific, mathematical, and philosophical ideas, because in this era each of these topics was deeply intertwined as a larger idea of ​​academic scope. This academy was more accessible in that no tuition fees werebilled, but nonetheless required the financial comfort to pursue a lifestyle with little monetary gain. This is similar to the current standard of a required unpaid internship in many fields. This academic space was made up of people who were educated, financially established, and able to travel in search of a greater truth. Not only that, but out of all the students at this academy, only two women have ever been students in this space. Through this insight into Plato's Academy, we find a select section of society at large who were even able to engage with his works, and these people were those who resembled Plato and had an educational background. This seems to be in stark contrast to his assertions in The Allegory of the Cave that the learned have a duty to "descend again to the prisoners in the cave and share their labors and honors, whether they are worth less or more." (Book VII: The Allegory of the Cave). Instead, Plato's work tends to fit more with his own description of someone who spent his time educated and therefore without truth, "the latter would fail because they would refuse to act, thinking that they had settled in the world during their lifetime. the distant islands of the Blessed”. We have now established that Plato had a narrow sphere of people capable of engaging with his ideas and creating the dialogue he found so valuable, which reinforced his status as a one-sided communicator. His published works have been stylized as dialogues primarily in order to reproduce the collaborative truth-telling that accompanies genuine discussion. Yet this places Plato's views as the basis for all "discussions" that occur, and removes the real interaction and creation of new ideas from his own. Plato created a privileged sphere of those with access to the truths he hoped to reveal and discover in the world and centered his views from a position of authority over those who consumed his communication, the listeners. John Stuart Mill is one of the founding fathers of modern liberalism, lauded for his revolutionary ideas of unfettered free speech, education for all and, most revolutionary in the eyes of some, he is a supporter of women's rights. Through his writings in Of the Liberty of Thought and Discussion, Mill advocates the need for all opinions to be freely expressed on two fronts; first, if the opinion is correct, those who have an incorrect opinion will get the truth; second, even if the opinion is false, those who are right benefit from the debate that consolidates the belief. Mill argues that often the truth also lies somewhere between two opposing viewpoints. These arguments establish a pretty strong position for Mill living in accordance with his philosophical ideas and the broader concept we found in Collaborative Truth. He often shared his views in newspapers and other publicly available publications, while welcoming dissenting views and even finding common truth on some issues. One glaring point that highlights Mill's hypocrisy on the issue of Collaborative Truth is his defense of Britain's imperialist action. John Stuart Mill was employed by the British East India Company for more than half his life. This society was only able to maintain its power and wealth thanks to Britain's inhumane rule over India. Mill considered India "barbaric" and not worthy of the same rights and liberties he so aggressively defended for white men and women: "he supposed that itThere was a readily available scale of civilization on which peoples could be ranked. He was quite certain that the English were civilized and that the people of Asia, Africa and Ireland were uncivilized and barbaric” (Sullivan, Eileen P.). This meant that his ideas about communication, free speech, collaborative truth, these ideas only applied to those he deemed worthy of them, and in this case that meant those who happened to be Europeans. This idea is again reflected in his idea that those with more education should have more than one voice. John Stuart Mill is hypocritical in his defense of the value of all perspectives and the right of each perspective to have equal weight, his Collaborative Truth conveniently excludes large segments of the world. David Bohm is a 20th century physicist and philosopher well known for contributions to the theoretical physics used for the atomic bomb and his philosophical perspective on communication. His book, On Communication, talks about the need for open dialogue in order to "create something new together." The point Bohm emphasizes most in this article is the value of the collaborative process as the primary reason for dialogue. He talks about the need to overcome one's "blockages" to communication, or an "insensitivity or 'anesthesia' in the face of one's own contradictions." In his dialogue proposal, Bohm further defines ideal communication facilitation in his style, a point he emphasizes concerns the role of a leader or instructor; “Any controlling authority, however carefully or sensitively applied, will tend to hinder and inhibit the free play of thought and the often delicate and subtle feelings which would otherwise be shared.” These two statements, that you must overcome your contradictions for constructive communication and that an authoritative role is contrary to the purpose of dialogue, come together to create a strong sense of irony in Bohm's On Communication. If a goal toward collaborative truth is sought, then using a written essay to best explain that one-sided dialogue is the “problem of communication” (On Communication) is hypocritical. Keep in mind: this is just a sample. Get a custom paper now from our expert writers.Get a Custom EssayAs a learning activity for this dive into communication, I was assigned a partner to complete a listening activity with. That meant meeting Zac Shields to spend 30 minutes trying to communicate. The modalities of this activity summarize the problem faced by each of the three authors that we analyzed, namely the limitation of the role of the auditor. In the instructions given to us to take turns, one partner spends 15 minutes talking about themselves, with the other partner unable to respond in any way other than talking about whoever is speaking, then we switched . The idea of ​​Collaborative Truth, which each of the philosophers has come to the conclusion and to which we have given a name, needs to be listened to as a communication tool and not as a role. In the case of Plato, Mill, and Bohm, each contradicts this idea in a slightly different way. Plato and Mill created a hierarchy that would exclude perspectives essential to the collaborative process. This is reflected in the limitations placed on the listener's role in the activity, with any response having to be tied to the speaker's own ideas. In Bohm's case, he contradicted himself by emphasizing the importance of truths shared and created in the form of a written work. His essay was authentic, but it lacks nuance that could be found if only he could ».. 2019.