The foundation of communication and action in consciousness: Confronting action theory with systems theoretical arguments

Contains fulltext : 63622-OA.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)In action theoretical approaches to the study of mass communication processes, media production and reception activity is interpreted (or ‘explained’) from the point of view of individual consciousness. The intentionality of the actor is viewed as the starting point for human (social) action. Communication is regarded as a process in which actors intentionally engage to exchange their minds’ contents and is therefore seen as a special case of human action. This view is challenged by Luhmann’s social systems theory, which conceives of communication as taking place outside of consciousness. Although communication is a product of the mutual non-transparency of individual consciousnesses, both consciousness and communication should be seen as self-reproducing systems which cannot interfere in each other’s operations. According to Luhmann, thoughts cannot be communicated: only communications can be communicated, and thoughts can merely be thought. Actions should be seen as the products of communication, namely of the attribution (be it through communication or through thinking) of social descriptions to systems. Although it may appear to be a fundamental issue, this difference in opinion between action and systems theory can be made productive. In this article, arguments are presented for incorporating Luhmann’s view of consciousness and communication as separate, but mutually observing systems into action theoretical approaches

Mediagebruik en de temporele organisatie van het dagelijks leven in huishoudens

Contains fulltext : 146708.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)391 p

De invloed van partners op elkaars mediagebruik: Een tijdbestedinganalyse van huishoudens

Contains fulltext : 56763.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)23 p

Therapeutisch onderzoek met wilsonbekwamen.

Contains fulltext : 63588.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access

[Cariology and restorative dentistry: old and new risks]

Complaints concerning restorative treatments at disciplinary tribunals are relatively rare. The nature of the complaints, the judgements, and the implicit view on caries management are, however, a cause of concern. Usually, the complaints are on alleged negligence because lesions were not or were too late restored. Modern caries management concentrating on disease control rather than on damage repair and its minimally invasive nature could be reasons of complaints concerning perceived negligence. As usual, careful documentation of findings, diagnostics, risk assessment, and monitoring decisions and good patient communication are decisive in preventing complaints. However, post-graduate education of dentists in caries detection, diagnosis, and management is needed to reduce the variability of caries care provided

Introduction: Meaningful media

Item does not contain fulltex