Burke's back again!

In his essay, Kenneth Burke delves into the idea of "terministic Screens" and how they function in discourse. He focuses on how the use of different screens can affect how we, as humans, not only view the piece of discourse, but the world. Burke also brings forward how terministic screens specifically direct attention either away from interpretations or towards them. For example the language used in a speech can either enhance or diminish an audience member's experience by triggering different correlations in their mind. Burke supports this by stating, "not only does the nature of our terms affect the nature of our observations, in a sense that the terms direct the attention to one field rather than another"(Burke 46). 

Genre

What I kind of want to do with my post tonight is talk about my SCD and what I did with it. So basically what I wrote about what Genre and what genre means. Initially I looked at what the Bedford Glossary defined as Genre. The definition of Genre was, "the classification of literary works on the basis of their content, form, or technique.” (Ray, Genre 202) It is clear that genres give you a way of classifying texts, but they are not only giving you a system to classify texts but they are setting expectations to of what a particular text is/needs to do. Genres provide you with important information that is needed to help examine a particular work. The Bedford Glossary states, "Genre is a helpful, though arguably loose and arbitrary, categorizing and descriptive device that provides a basic vantage point for examining most historical and many modern and contemporary works." (Ray, Genre 203) While genres can play some useful roles, not all agree that they are beneficial. Many find that a text cannot be completely one genre or another, this is because genres have become too rigid.

Dichotomies and Victimage

Burke develops a lot of binaries with regards to identification and termanistic screens: scientistic versus dramatistic, continuous versus discontinuous. These binaries come about for the same reason that he elucidates when speaking about multiple termanistic screens; it take multiple termanisitc screens to explain all sides of a concept. These dichotomies do not even cover every facet of the subject; there are situations in which the identification of something is neither scientistic nor dramatistic, neither continuous nor dicontinuous. Burke accounts for this somewhat when he points out that the scientistic/dramatistic dichotomy is not mutually exclusive, but there are so many ways these binaries can overlap or rule each other out it’s as though there are more categories than Burke could count.

Burke mentions a “proneness” of people to symbolic language. Equally intrinsic then, it might be said, is people’s proneness to categorization; furthermore, catergorization being necessarily reductive.
 

Terministic Screens

In “Terministic Screens,” Kenneth Burke points out three things that terministic screens do for our understanding of language:

1. “’Terministic screens’ direct the attention” (45).
2. “Not only does the nature of our terms affect the nature of our observations, in the sense that the terms direct the attention to one field rather than to the other” (46).
3.  “’Reality’ could not exist for us, were it not for our…involvement in symbol systems” (48).

Basically, terminsitic screens provide the reader with a window to view the different uses of language, some that may be unfamiliar.  I, of course, picked out “symbol” from Burke’s third assertion (“’Reality ‘could not exist for us, were it not for our…involvement in symbol systems”). 

I Love Burke!! :)

Terministic Screen, “a screen composed of terms through which humans perceive the world, and that direct attention away from some interpretations and toward others.” Words convey a particular meaning, conjuring images and ideas that induce support toward beliefs or opinions. Receivers of the words interpret the intended message through a metaphorical screen of their own vocabulary and perspective to the world. Everyone has their own way of interpreting things based on their terministic screens. "Not only does the nature of our terms affect the nature of our observations, in the sense that the terms direct the attention to one field rather than another."(46) You and i both may be listening to the same speech, but it triggers something totally different in me than it does in you.

Burke's Screens

“Terministic Screens” is the perfect piece to push the importance of language as symbols, word choice and association. According to Burke's theory, people build their own interpretation of a message by the language that is given; hence the reason you'll have multiple interpretations on one subject. Depending on the culture in a certain era, word choice sets up a “screen” which is sensed upon the viewer's perception of reality. Clever on Burke's part, to consider one's attitude on a subject as a “screen”; much like a TV or better yet a projector- which could symbolize a new world. He gives a great example of some photographs he once saw, “they were different photographs of the same objects, the difference being that they were made with different color filters” (45).
 

Deterministic Screens

It's not about the content but the context through which the content is framed. I thought "Terministic Screens" was a reminder to read between the lines of a text. Especially when I read Pascals demonstration of 'directed intention'. It reminded me of why Rhetoric is still the only faculty of being human than allows for precise communication. It's as if our senses are communicating tou our consciousness/ It is symbolic of the process of internalization and the complex network of histories that shape each individuals experience. Terministic screens are a way to break away from established paradigms and smoothly interject new ones. 

Burke, Kenneth. “Terministic Screens.” In Language as Symbolic Action: Essays on Life, Literature, and Method. Berkeley: U of California P, 1966. 44-57.

Terministic Screens

Terministic Screens allow for the reader to identify different uses of language. Burke’s idea that “one must view language as a given” opened many doors for me. Trying to find the root and origin of language is futile. There will always be counters and arguments. The dividing it into the “scientific” and the “dramatistic” seems to limit the idea, but in reality it does not. Neither of these two ideas are exclusive, as Burke presents.

Necessity of the Terministic Screens

Burke’s Terministic Screens explains the importance of using different terminologies in language. He explains,  “‘Reality’ could not exist for us, were it not for our profound and inveterate involvement in symbol systems”(Burke 48). Though some find symbolism as a figure of speech that causes certain texts to flow better, it is actually a technique that is necessary in communication. This reminded me of the discussion of metaphor and how this is another figure of speech that has come to be known as a tool to make discourse sound more eloquent, but in reality is necessary in critical thinking. In my opinion, the same applies to symbolism. Much of the symbolism discussed by Burke in the text can be used to make a text sound more eloquent, but can also be a critical tool in communication. 

Understanding Terministic Screens

The idea that terministic screens can deflect reality rather than reflect realty becomes evident in Kenneth Burke's essay.  I was thinking of them as somewhat screening the view of something that is being describes just as a pool screen might alter your view out.  I do believe that this comparison can be useful and that terministic screens do operate in this way.  You get a broad picture of what reality is though your view is not as clear as actual reality.
 

Terministic Screens

Terministic screens are reasonable when speaking on the subject of symbols. Language, as a system of culturally recognized symbols, must necessarily include a wide variety of screens or the symbols could not stand for their definitions. The act of comparing two things must inevitably minimize their differences; the act of distinguishing things inevitably performs the opposite. Any symbolic act (which seems to be a definitive aspect of language for Burke) will rearrange reality to suit its purposes, to justify its intention. What seems weird to me (and maybe it's because I missed something) is just how relativistic it truly is. About the only thing he can do to save this theory from "the abyss" is to say that, even if these compositions and divisions are illusions, we must respect them as human beings in order to go about our lives. He states, "I'm even willing to grant that the distinction between things moving and persons acting is but an illusion. All I would claim is that, illusion or not, the human race cannot possibly get along with itself on the basis of any other intuition." (53)

Terministic Screens: Reflect, Select, and Deflect.

“We must use terministic screens, since we can’t say anything without the use of terms; whatever terms we use, they necessarily constitute a corresponding kind of screen; and any such screen necessarily directs the attention to one field rather than another. Within that field there can be different screens, each with its own ways of directing the attention and shaping the range of observations implicit in the given terminology” Burke (50).

A Terministic screen is a  screen or lens through which people come to the acknowledgement of a language system that determines an individual's perception and symbolic action in the world. For Kenneth Burke, a terministic screen is a type of lens, that is composed of terms through with humans perceive the world. He says that they direct attention away from some interpretations and toward others. They have to be used because we can't communicate without the use of terms. The terms we choose to use when we communicate create a "corresponding kind of screen" that "direct attention differently, and thus led to a corresponding different quality of observation" (Burke 49). The terms used in communication are able to shape the observations and reality of a individual.   

   

Terministic Screens and Reality

In his essay, “Terministic Screens,” Kennith Burke discusses the effect that external forces have on our knowledge and understanding.  I am pleasantly suppressed to have come to this discovery after failing to grasp the material after reading it for the first time.  My method of understanding this material on the second go around was to take my time, read with purpose and highlight important key sections.  

Kenneth Burke discusses the concept of “Scientistic” language in the second sentence of his work, his purpose for doing so was so that he could break down two important terms that are crucial for the interpretation and understanding of this text, “Naming” and “Definition.”  These two words help do describe the way in which humans see the world, there is the object, concept, idea etc. itself, and then their is its name, whatever humans decide to call it.  This theory is truly remarkable in that it is destroying the concept that humans have created anything at all, we are simply discovering and, for lack of a better word, trademarking it.  “The ultimate origins of language seem to me as mysterious as the origins of the universe itself.  One must view it, I feel, simply as the ‘given.’ But once an animal comes into being that does happen to have this particular aptitude, the various tribal idioms are unquestionably developed by their use as an instruments in the tribe’s way of living” (Burke 44).  

Burke, Terministic Screen

A terministic screen, according to Kenneth Buurke, is a screen of words through which humans interact with and perceive the world. He argues that through these screens – screens of specific diction and terms- affect our observations of the world. Burke theorized that these screens, when applied by any individual, affected the way the individual perceived things.

“Not only does the nature of our terms affect the nature of our observations, in the sense that the terms direct the attention to one field rather than to another” (Burke, 46).

Burke and Terministic Screens

"Even if any given terminology is a reflection of reality, by its very nature as a terminology it must be a selection of reality; and to this extent it must function also as a deflection of reality." --Burke (45)

This is my second time reading this excerpt and I am still a bit stumped. I tried to tackle it the best I could. First, what are terministic screens? According to Burkes Language As Symbolic Action, he defined the concept as “a screen composed of terms through which humans perceive the world, and that direct attention away from some interpretations and toward others.” Burke first devised his concept of "terministic screens" as a way of understanding the relationship between language and ideology. In other context, like race theory, terministic screens would be at work. Because of the distinction of many types of races within the world, race theory would probably stir up some trouble. We have so many different people coming from totally different backgrounds, cultures, values, etc. that the terms included in each screen vary from person to person. The topic of slavery would mean something different to every person and their attention would be guided by their established particular terms.

Reflections, Selections, and Deflections

I have read excerpts of Kenneth Burke's "Terministic Screens" and always find it challenging but enlightening.  The concept of 'terministic screen' comes from Burke himself and it is one of his most important ideas.  Referring to this concept, Burke says, "Even if any given terminology is a reflection of reality, by its very nature as a terminology it must be a selection of reality; and to this extent it must function also as a deflection of reality (Burke 45)."  This description of terministic screens can be broken down into three individual parts.

1) Reflection of Reality...These reflections are experiences and viewpoints that we choose to accept as true.  These reflections become our reality and the way we view the world around us.

2) Selections of Reality...By selecting these realities, we are getting rid of other reflections.  We do not have the capacity to accept all possible viewpoints.

3) Deflections of Reality...These are the realities that we deny automatically by taking on our own reflections.  The deflections could be something that we choose not to accept because it disagrees with our views and beliefs.

Thinking through Terministic Screens

Kenneth Burke, in Terministic Screens, argues that all terminology is selective and therefore “reflects” and “deflects” reality in terms of ideology (45). One’s choice of terms communicate implications and interpretations that are unspoken but understood through the terms selected (49). With that said, chosen terms can allow an observer to quickly categorize a speaker/writer into their corresponding school (be it theology, Darwinism, philosophy, psychology, etc.) without their explicitly saying so. Burke categorizes all mankind to be “symbol users” who create relationships with reality through symbols and language (48).  He uses this argument to question any given person’s perception of reality, as it is limited to “our profound and inveterate involvement in symbol systems,” (48).