Question

Bormann insisted that SCT is an objective theory that's valid any time and in any culture, but that its methodology, fantasy theme analysis, is interpretive. Do you regard SCT as a better objective or interpretive
theory? Why?

Answer 1

Ernest G. Bormann was a professor of communication. He developed the Symbolic Convergence Theory (SCT). It is a rhetorical communication. Bormann and his colleagues observed that group members often dramatize the events that happen previously and add fantasy to it that creates symbolic convergence that means they come together to make a whole. According to him, fantasies encouraged group cohesion and sustain group consciousness. It fosters shared social reality among the group members.

Group cohesion happens when like-minded people come together and initiate a collective task that is spontaneous and voluntarily, the sustainability of the groups is based on their sharing common goal or purpose with a sense of mutual belonging. The sense of mutual belonging helps in keeping the group relationship intact. To keep the relationship intact it requires personal sacrifice and good understanding and that can be attained with rhetorical communication that persuades each member of the group.

The symbolic suggests that it is not real it is fantasy and convergence denotes the like-mindedness of the group members to create group consciousness and cohesiveness through mutual understanding of common social reality.

The group consensus remains in the participation of its members when the participation is emotional, dramatized, and full of fantasies it leads to the formation of shared beliefs called rhetorical vision.

His theory is valid at any time and it is more interpretative because it is based on how people communicate to develop shared values and that can create convergence. It gives group identity that is more than an individual's isolated experience and belief.

A fantasy them analysis is a methodology it tells that every drama has a value and these values are told through different characters and our response to those values are keys to our belief, it is how we react to the act the character plays we laugh at the act if we identify our belief with that act. The character of the drama in fantasy plays the role of life and vibrancy of the team, the functional characters represent the positive and optimistic approach of an individual of the team. The action plan in the drama helps in finding whether the rhetorical vision is passive or active, comedy, or tragedy it represents the past, present, and future. It gives a view into whether the action is practical or impractical, right or wrong, palatable, or unpalatable.

Through fantasy themes, we construct coherent worlds listening to the stories and by believing in it we understand how the world acts ad draws a basic value from which others values and behavior spring. It is important to note that the audience may not accept the drama in totality but it helped in emotional arousal and drive the group towards action in achieving the goal.

The fantasy theme is interpretive because the group members relate themselves to the events of past, present, and future through fantasy that help in developing the emotions of the group members to achieve their goal and develop group consciousness.

It was considered as an objective theory because it was assumed to be representing shared fantasies of a group that creates symbolic convergence and that is true for all people regardless of the time, communication context, and culture. But as per Borman, it is an objective and interpretive both because it has the essence of drama and fantasy that represents the events of all the time.